The way he approached the review was pretty terrible
Knocking the game because recruiting doesn't pay off? (recruiting is extremely important and rewarding part of college football...you can sim it if you dont want to do it)
Approaching it by talking about Madden half the review? (No one would review a madden game and talk about NCAA half the time...its pointless, dont do it)
Knocking the ESPN presentation by saying we're beat over the head with it?
He didn't talk about anything that a true fan of college football, football in general, or the NCAA series would really need to know about a game before they bought it (playbooks, assignment blocking, the way the game compares with last years title, etc) and when he did, it was a quick 2 second shout out.
And it seems his biggest beef was no new features, when quite frankly, most fans of the series want them to improve what's already in the game before they move on to a new feature. No few features, but improvement on the core is actually a positive.
I do agree with his comment about not knowing if many people will utilize the online dynasty management and writing. But as for the rest, it def seems like he is reviewing the game for casual players and not die hards.
I'm actually pretty skeptical of the game because it seems every year we're told its great, but the sticking points of his review still didn't tell me nearly enough about the game to decide if I'd purchase it or not.