How can we make recruiting more fun or better?

[StormJH1]

I'm not really sure why the way things currently are is worthy of complaint. I mean, I like the recruiting, and others are entitled to not like it. But if you don't like it, I don't see what the problem is with just turning the CPU recruiting assistance on, or simply quick calling everyone. You could even just let the CPU take the reins in the regular season and take over for the offseason stuff afterwards.

I think the roulette approach is much more realistic than what we had before. It feels like more dynamic conversation that recruits may want to talk about things that your program isn't very good at. You then have the choice of trying to pass on that, or selling them on something that is a weak point of your school. In the past, it felt like an artificial mini-game to keep the stupid smiley face from turning angry, even though there was no rhyme or reason to how that happened.

For the purpose of evolution, there may be some small changes they could make for NCAA 12 that wouldn't disturb what's already good or over-complicate things. I'd like to see more spontaneous events in the process that break up the routine. For example, make the promise system work BOTH ways, and fix the A.I. so that it actually works. Have the high school prospect ask you to promise that he won't redshirt his first year, or that he'll get a certain jersey #, whatever.

Also, if they brought back the discipline system they were playing with in the mid 2000's and did it in a way that actually made sense, I think they'd have something really great there. Discipline is MAJOR factor in recruiting - it's the reason why Randy Moss never played for Notre Dame and why some FBS studs end up transferring to Division 2 schools. What they got wrong last time was that they would limit the amount of points you could use to penalize a guy. There shouldn't be a limit to how much discipline you hand out...the "limit" should be the adverse effect of not having the guy available. And if you recruit bad guys who do bad things, that should have a negative effect on several of your pitches, as well as risking the loss of scholarships, probation, etc. I think they got close to doing that in NCAA 2005, they just got a rid of it altogether instead of working on it and doing it in a way that made sense.

[skeezapleez]

Quote: Originally Posted by StormJH1

Also, if they brought back the discipline system they were playing with in the mid 2000's and did it in a way that actually made sense, I think they'd have something really great there. Discipline is MAJOR factor in recruiting - it's the reason why Randy Moss never played for Notre Dame and why some FBS studs end up transferring to Division 2 schools. What they got wrong last time was that they would limit the amount of points you could use to penalize a guy. There shouldn't be a limit to how much discipline you hand out...the "limit" should be the adverse effect of not having the guy available. And if you recruit bad guys who do bad things, that should have a negative effect on several of your pitches, as well as risking the loss of scholarships, probation, etc. I think they got close to doing that in NCAA 2005, they just got a rid of it altogether instead of working on it and doing it in a way that made sense.

This is one of my biggest wishes for them to bring back. I mean, what school at some point in the year doesn't have SOME type of necessary discipline on one of their players? And they could have a rating that goes along with this like "Off Field Composure" or something to that effect which would regulate how often the guy gets in trouble/struggles with grades, etc.

[StormJH1]

Quote: Originally Posted by jbrew2411

I'm one that loves recruiting. It's the reason I play NCAA over Madden. The only time I spend more then 10 minutes is at the start of the year when I set my board up. I spend about 5 minutes each week recruiting. I'm not a fan of the "roll the dice" style but do like what they have added. I wonder if those not having "fun" are maxing out their boards and trying to recruit all those players? I could see where that would get old. If you are try reducing that number of targets to 15-20 players. The one thing I wish they would add is a National Signing Day and not have the recruits sign until then. You could sway recruits right up to the end. That would give it a more true to life fell.

Not a bad idea, but I don't want that feature at the expense of the Instant Commits, which were a GREAT addition and really get you excited to recruit on a weekly basis. The fact that you can land quality players as early as Week 1 (and the strategies that go into making that happen) is awesome.

But you could do something where you have to get a clear lead (say over 100 points) over the other teams vying for a recruit, and if it ends up that there's 2-4 teams still in the mix toward the end of the year, it reverts to "National Signing Day" announcement, instead of Hard or Soft commit. That could be cool.

[StormJH1]

Quote: Originally Posted by skeezapleez

This is one of my biggest wishes for them to bring back. I mean, what school at some point in the year doesn't have SOME type of necessary discipline on one of their players? And they could have a rating that goes along with this like "Off Field Composure" or something to that effect which would regulate how often the guy gets in trouble/struggles with grades, etc.

I hope that they didn't get pressure from NCAA to leave that out of the game. I remember that EA was ready to put in a feature in where fans would rush the field and tear down the goalposts after a major win/upset, but the NCAA stepped in and said that they didn't want to encourage that behavior by putting it in their exclusively licensed video game. I'd be disappointed, but not surprised, to learn that the NCAA didn't kids skipping tests, cheating, getting into legal trouble, or (gasp) accepting cash from boosters as part of a their video game about college athletes.

There's a lot of behind the scenes politicking that goes on with these games and licenses. I recall that one of the NCAA or Madden producers was hinting that the reason EA didn't go all out with ESPN licensing was that they didn't want to put the NFL in a situation where they were pissing off their other broadcasting partners (like Fox, CBS, and NBC) by putting out a game that made it look like ESPN/ABC televises every football game.

[skeezapleez]

Quote: Originally Posted by StormJH1

I hope that they didn't get pressure from NCAA to leave that out of the game. I remember that EA was ready to put in a feature in where fans would rush the field and tear down the goalposts after a major win/upset, but the NCAA stepped in and said that they didn't want to encourage that behavior by putting it in their exclusively licensed video game. I'd be disappointed, but not surprised, to learn that the NCAA didn't kids skipping tests, cheating, getting into legal trouble, or (gasp) accepting cash from boosters as part of a their video game about college athletes.

I can almost guarantee that was THE reason it was left out of the last few iterations of the games. IMO it adds a bit more realism to it to have guy struggling off the field to make grades, or getting in legal trouble. It's not like the original rosters have any real names in them so it's not as if you're hurting anyone's image beside the school. And even then it's an online persona that's dirtied not the actual school. I just don't get it.