SEC WR Ratings

[Pogo27]

Here are some of last seasons REAL stats for SEC receivers who will be returning this year. Can match the stats to the player based on the EA ratings for that player? No cheating.

1. 60 catches, 997 yards, 10 touchdowns, 16.6 ypc
2. 48 catches, 897 yards, 7 touchdowns, 18.7 ypc
3. 53 catches, 808 yards, 6 touchdowns, 15.2 ypc
4. 46 catches, 763 yards, 6 touchdowns, 16.6 ypc
5. 53 catches, 735 yards, 3 touchdowns, 13.9 ypc
6. 41 catches, 681 yards, 5 touchdowns, 16.6 ypc
7. 46 catches, 680 yards, 4 touchdowns, 14.8 ypc
8. 43 catches, 596 yards, 4 touchdowns, 13.9 ypc
9. 29 catches, 568 yards, 7 touchdowns, 19.6 ypc
10. 40 catches, 540 yards, 7 touchdowns, 13.5 ypc

Again, all of these are stats for SEC wide receivers who played last season and are returning, therefore these stats all match up with a player in the game.

I've only put SEC receivers in this list because, for one, I think there are some extremely over/under rated WRs in the SEC, and two it's only fair to compare teams that are for the most part competing against the same defenses. I'm not trying to say SEC defenses are better or worse, only that these ten WRs mostly played against the same defenses.

[okstate123]

You can't just compare stats and decide who the better player is. By that logic, Texas Tech should have a top QB year in, year out regardless of actual skill.

[Pogo27]

Quote: Originally Posted by okstate123

You can't just compare stats and decide who the better player is. By that logic, Texas Tech should have a top QB year in, year out regardless of actual skill.

If you'll read the stuff below, I pointed out that I'm comparing only players WITHIN a single conference. They're playing against the same sort of defenses.

I understand what you're saying. That's why I'm not comparing these WR stats to the WRs at Houston or TTU, or wherever. These are all stats from WRs in the SEC that all play 8 of their 12 games against SEC defenses.

Also, it's the SEC. Almost everyone in the league is using a mostly balanced pro-style playbook. Sure, some schools may be a little more pass heavy and some may be a little more run heavy, but I bet if you looked at the numbers, no one is more than 60/40 one way or the other.


And I'm also not suggesting that stats be the ONLY indicator of how a player should be rated in the game. I just think that when you see where a couple players fall in this top 10 ranking of SEC returning WRs, there are some head scratchers when it comes to EA's rating of the players.

[okstate123]

Quote: Originally Posted by Pogo27

If you'll read the stuff below, I pointed out that I'm comparing only players WITHIN a single conference. They're playing against the same sort of defenses. I understand what you're saying. That's why I'm not comparing these WR stats to the WRs at Houston or TTU, or wherever. These are all stats from WRs in the SEC that all play 8 of their 12 games against SEC defenses. Also, it's the SEC. Almost everyone in the league is using a mostly balanced pro-style playbook. Sure, some schools may be a little more pass heavy and some may be a little more run heavy, but I bet if you looked at the numbers, no one is more than 60/40 one way or the other. And I'm also not suggesting that stats be the ONLY indicator of how a player should be rated in the game. I just think that when you see where a couple players fall in this top 10 ranking of SEC returning WRs, there are some head scratchers when it comes to EA's rating of the players.

You have some valid points, but I'm only arguing that stats, especially in college aren't a good way to determine the talent of the player.

For instance, Alabama is a deep team. We can both agree on that, right? So, it's likely that their 4th WR could very well be the #1 guy at, idk, Kentucky (just an example). However, Kentucky's 1st WR will get many more chances to produce than Alabama's 4th guy. But, it doesn't mean he's as talented.

[Pogo27]

Quote: Originally Posted by okstate123

You have some valid points, but I'm only arguing that stats, especially in college aren't a good way to determine the talent of the player. For instance, Alabama is a deep team. We can both agree on that, right? So, it's likely that their 4th WR could very well be the #1 guy at, idk, Kentucky (just an example). However, Kentucky's 1st WR will get many more chances to produce than Alabama's 4th guy. But, it doesn't mean he's as talented.

What if Arkansas' 2nd and 3rd guys have comparable stats to Alabama's 1st WR, and Arkansas 1st WR is SIGNIFICANTLY higher than Alabama's 1st WR?

Should Alabama's 1st WR still be rated a 97 while Arkansas' WRs be rated 92, 92, 89?


Moreover, should Alabama's 2nd WR, who isn't on that list (he'd actually be #11 on that list) be a 92 while there are plenty of guys on that list who are rated lower than 92?

And Alabama's 3rd WR would be 20+ on that list, yet is rated an 89.

[okstate123]

Quote: Originally Posted by Pogo27

What if Arkansas' 2nd and 3rd guys have comparable stats to Alabama's 1st WR, and Arkansas 1st WR is SIGNIFICANTLY higher than Alabama's 1st WR? Should Alabama's 1st WR still be rated a 97 while Arkansas' WRs be rated 92, 92, 89? Moreover, should Alabama's 2nd WR, who isn't on that list (he'd actually be #11 on that list) be a 92 while there are plenty of guys on that list who are rated lower than 92? And Alabama's 3rd WR would be 20+ on that list, yet is rated an 89.

Two completely different offensive styles. You're comparing apples to oranges.

It's a general consensus among college football analysts that AJ Green and Julio Jones are the top two WRs in the SEC, probably even the nation. Unless you think EA should have gone against this, I don't see your point.

[wildcats30]

Quote: Originally Posted by okstate123

You have some valid points, but I'm only arguing that stats, especially in college aren't a good way to determine the talent of the player. For instance, Alabama is a deep team. We can both agree on that, right? So, it's likely that their 4th WR could very well be the #1 guy at, idk, Kentucky (just an example). However, Kentucky's 1st WR will get many more chances to produce than Alabama's 4th guy. But, it doesn't mean he's as talented.

Randall Cobb would start for Alabama opposite Julio Jones IMO. Cobb is UK's #1 WR and can play in the wildcat at QB(over 500 yards rushing and 10TD's last year) and can run back Punts and Kicks...maybe you should have used Vandy as your example.

[okstate123]

Quote: Originally Posted by wildcats30

Randall Cobb would start for Alabama opposite Julio Jones IMO. Cobb is UK's #1 WR and can play in the wildcat at QB(over 500 yards rushing and 10TD's last year) and can run back Punts and Kicks...maybe you should have used Vandy as your example.

That wasn't really point. No need to get so defensive.