Please at some point just replace the 1 star recruits with 2 and 3 star guys

[mgoblue678]

Quote: Originally Posted by jmik58

i see what you're saying, that in the game (not in real life) 1* players don't equate to sufficiently skilled players. 1* might as well be walk-ons. Don't get caught up in the label though. Perhaps the ratings need to overlap to help this.

Whatever the case may be, I don't think they have any business being in the game for the most part, let alone having half or sometimes more than half of the lower prestige teams recruiting classes made up of these guys. There are just too many of them.

[Solidice]

Quote: Originally Posted by mgoblue678

Whatever the case may be, I don't think they have any business being in the game for the most part, let alone having half or sometimes more than half of the lower prestige teams recruiting classes made up of these guys. There are just too many of them.

it's just a label. if the 1* title was removed, it's not going to change the ratings of those players. I believe he(Russ) said in the other thread that the star ratings are applied after the recruits are generated. so those 1* players would just be 2* players with the same ratings as they would have as a 1* player.

I just think of 1* as the 'everyone else' category and move on.

[willIam9387]

What they should do in terms of recruiting is make it more involved and hands-on. For instance why not show a projected overall rating range. Your recruiting, and you see a Four star WR with an OVR range of 81-82, but there's also a four star recruit with a range of 65-85. Obviously the one recruit is a sure thing, you know where you stand on him, while the other could be a project and could result in having a all-conference player or a bust. Your ability to help a project player progress to his highest possible OVR is contingent on the quality of your training facilities, coaching staff, etc. NCAA basketball had a feature like this where you can upgrade your facilities based on accomplishment, and there's no reason why NCAA football can't have this. Also the quality of your scout would have an impact, as teams with better scouts would be able to better assess the OVR range for a recruit. And I agree one star recruits in this game serve no purpose, however, the whole recruiting system in NCAA is flawed because I see really no hands-on capability to actually help your recruits to progress, it's really random which in real life is not the case.

[Ricky Rowe Zay]

Quote: Originally Posted by jmik58

i see what you're saying, that in the game (not in real life) 1* players don't equate to sufficiently skilled players. 1* might as well be walk-ons. Don't get caught up in the label though. Perhaps the ratings need to overlap to help this.

I think so too.

1* guys should come in at 68-72
2* guys should come in at 70-75
3* guys should come in at 72-78
4* guys should come in at 74-81
5* guys should come in at 76-84

The low 5* guys 76-78 turn into the busts who never become starters, and often times end up transferring to a smaller school but become fringe NFL players by the end of their career with a rating at like 89 or 90 when you export them to Madden.

I think its possible. If they wanted help to do it, I'd do it for free.

[Zuke]

The gems happen at least before the tune it did i have gotten 4* LB 65 ovr and a 3* LB 68 ovr and even got a 3* WR 73 ovr

[Ricky Rowe Zay]

Quote: Originally Posted by Zuke

The gems happen at least before the tune it did i have gotten 4* LB 65 ovr and a 3* LB 68 ovr and even got a 3* WR 73 ovr

Yeah thats the part I hate about it. I put a guy at the top of my board rated as a 4* to fill a key position, only for him to get on campus and hes rated like 70 and I have to redshirt him and move a Safety to LB.

At minimum these guys should be like 74 or 75. At least they stand a chance to compete for PT, just like most 4* guys do in real life if they dont become a star.

[mgoblue678]

Quote: Originally Posted by Solidice

it's just a label. if the 1* title was removed, it's not going to change the ratings of those players. I believe he said in the other thread that the star ratings are applied after the recruits are generated. so those 1* players would just be 2* players with the same ratings as they would have as a 1* player. I just think of 1* as the 'everyone else' category and move on.

And I don't agree there should be that a many recruits generated to have that low of rating(in the 40's) regardless of if the star is applied after they are generated or not . That is the equivalent of a walk on.

And like I said the real issue is a significant part of the lower prestige schools recruiting class are made up of these guys. You don't need almost a 40 point difference between the worst and best recruits in the game, to me that is overkill.

[gigem]

Just get rid of 1* star recruits, make it so NO recruit comes in under 55 or 60 or something.