Home

OMT: These teams should get a star boost in 2010

This is a discussion on OMT: These teams should get a star boost in 2010 within the NCAA Football forums.

Go Back   Operation Sports Forums > Football > NCAA Football
FIFA 21 Review
Tennis World Tour 2 Review
Doug Flutie's Maximum Football 2020 Review
Poll: Which next-gen console are you going to purchase? (Click to vote)
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-25-2009, 06:16 PM   #25
MVP
 
deadlyCane's Arena
 
OVR: 17
Join Date: Aug 2002
Re: OMT: These teams should get a star boost in 2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by youALREADYknow
They already have all of these:

Program Tradition = Traditional Prestige
Championship Contender = Buzz Prestige
Main "Star" Prestige = Generational Prestige

They just need to fix the system and rankings because the way it's done in NCAA 09 is terrible.
Once again youALREADYKnow has it right.

Either fix it or give us the option to do accelerated prestige like they have now, or a normal rate prestige (what it should really be).
__________________
----------
PSN: RuFF_NeXX

MLB: Toronto Blue Jays
NBA: Toronto Raptors
CFL: Toronto Argonauts
NFL: Miami Dolphins
NCAA Football: Miami Hurricanes
NCAA Basketball: Miami Hurricanes
NCAA Baseball: Miami Hurricanes
deadlyCane is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 01-25-2009, 07:52 PM   #26
Rookie
 
seawolves9's Arena
 
OVR: 7
Join Date: Dec 2006
Re: OMT: These teams should get a star boost in 2010

I'd like to have the option between accelerated prestige and normal. That'd be something that everyone could be comfortable with. The hardcores and the casual. I also wouldn't mind having like a slow prestige option as well.
seawolves9 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2009, 10:06 PM   #27
MVP
 
youALREADYknow's Arena
 
OVR: 28
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: DC
Posts: 3,630
Re: OMT: These teams should get a star boost in 2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by seawolves9
I'd like to have the option between accelerated prestige and normal. That'd be something that everyone could be comfortable with. The hardcores and the casual. I also wouldn't mind having like a slow prestige option as well.
That would be great. Really it's amazing how few options we have to start a mode as complicated as a dynasty.
youALREADYknow is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2009, 10:32 PM   #28
Rookie
 
seawolves9's Arena
 
OVR: 7
Join Date: Dec 2006
Re: OMT: These teams should get a star boost in 2010

I agree. There should be more things to choose from. All we got right now is team selection, settings, and auto generated names or numbers only.
seawolves9 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2009, 12:35 AM   #29
Rookie
 
OVR: 5
Join Date: Apr 2006
Re: OMT: These teams should get a star boost in 2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by youALREADYknow
You're clearly part of the instant gratification, can't remember past yesterday crowd. Michigan will clearly be back in the national picture within the next year or two because they are still getting 4-5 star commitments. Last year, they had 17 4-star commitments and this year they are on pace for 12 4-star commitments and 1 5-star.

Add this to the fact that they sellout every home game in the largest football stadium in the country.... and the 43 current NFL players who went to Michigan, I'd say they are pretty damn prestigious.

I'm a Florida State fan, so I have no reason to butter Michigan's bread. The bottom line is that prestige is not a 1 year award.
And I'm not saying prestige should be a one year award or demerit. What I am saying is that, as far as recruiting is concerned, having a down year (especially as a result of a coaching change) is going to have an effect. It's minimal for a school like Michigan than if something similar happened at, say, Rutgers.

The main part of my point that seems to be overlooked is that EA shouldn't be hasty in giving a program a high prestige rating simply because ESPN created a formula that ranked a team that's been nearly insignificant or had a few or several bad years in the top 25 (or whatever) in their prestige poll. Acknowledge that they have some history to them, fine, but you have to take history with a grain of salt.

Let's take your beloved Seminoles. They were the team to beat in the 90s (or one of them), but this decade things have gone a little sour. Florida State is not as prestigious as it used to be; this statement acknowledges the program's history, but it also acknowledges current prestige or importance.
kestrel is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2009, 09:55 AM   #30
MVP
 
youALREADYknow's Arena
 
OVR: 28
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: DC
Posts: 3,630
Re: OMT: These teams should get a star boost in 2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by kestrel
Florida State is not as prestigious as it used to be; this statement acknowledges the program's history, but it also acknowledges current prestige or importance.
But how much "prestige" have they really lost?

We're talking about a 6 star system here. Are you saying that they have lost 1/6th of their prestige within the last few years? I'd argue that they haven't and the number of early commits from elite prospects supports my case. The media coverage of their games supports my case. They're clearly not viewed the same as before but the impact has been minimal. They're just not as much of a championship contender.

If we're on a 0-100 scale, then I'm perfectly fine with prestige changing every season. But right now we have 6 stars and it's absurd for anyone to think that even a team like Utah or Boise State who have put together undefeated seasons and beat BCS elite teams could have their prestige raised from 3 stars to 5/6 stars within a span of 2-3 years. Utah is not a 6 star program now and they still won't get the national media coverage that mediocre BCS schools get. They have already put together one of their better recruiting classes in history, but it's still not a top 25 class which means I'd rank them 5 out of 6 stars in recruiting. Utah is a 4 star program and unless they win a BCS Championship in the next few years I don't see any of that changing.

As another example, Boise State becomes a 5 star program on my copy of NCAA 09 and yet has ZERO nationally televised games during the next season. This would never happen to one of the most prestigious programs in real life.

I agree with your statements about prestige as they apply to the real world, but you have to translate that into the world of the NCAA Football game.

Anyways, this subject was brought up to Greg (NCAA designer) and he had this to say:

Quote:
"I talked with our dynasty guys and the system is based on a checklist of things you do or do not do each season. The main 3 criteria used to determine a User Team's prestige is BCS Rank, Bowl bids (types matter), and if you Win/Lose the bowl game you're invited to. Once you are 6-star we look at your season record in addition to the previous criteria, and if you aren't over .500 this will have an impact. The CPU is just left up to random dice roll on them raising/dropping."
It's not hard to see that this current approach is a horrible way of determining prestige. It takes into account nothing but on-field play during a season regardless of opponent.
youALREADYknow is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

« Operation Sports Forums > Football > 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 09:25 AM.

Top -