Recruits have to be A LOT Deeper

[44drob]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cubs017

Sorry, I've just never understood the demand for this. If your QB throws for 4000 yards then why do you need his ratings to go up? So you can throw for 6000 yards instead? He's already performing like a star player.

Well you can see atleast a little change in a players peformance rarely do you see it a players senior year IRL. But Freshman year all the way to Senior year players do get better as they get a good grasp of the program.

And this rarely happens to CPU controlled teams on the game they never really get better.

.................................................. ...............

But anyway i was thinking that they should have a overall range or they could possibly add a potential rating in there it would help with player progression.

***** around 79-84.........(95+) Player with high Potential ratings may gain up to 15 + points (0-70) players with low Potential ratings gain 0-5 points possibly losing 1-4 points

**** around 74-79.........(90+) Player with high Potential ratings may gain up to 15 + points (0-65) players with low Potential ratings gain 0-4 points possibly losing 2-5 points

*** around 69-74.........(90's) Player with high Potential ratings may gain up to 20+ points (0-60) players with low Potential ratings gain 3-5 points possibly losing 3-5 points


** around 62-69.........(90's) Player with high Potential ratings may gain up to 20 + points (0-60) players with low Potential ratings gain 0 points possibly losing 1-10 points

** around 0-62......... (90's)Player with high Potential ratings may gain up to 15 + points(0-60)players with low Potential ratings gain 0 points possibly losing 1-15 points

?????????

just a thought but i do agree that the recruiting does need to be deeper as a whole

[Roggie]

Why make it to where the super low overall guys already have the chance to lose the most overall? Shouldn't the higher up guys be able to lose more overall wise compared to the worst recruit? A bust 5 star should hurt more than a bust 1 star.

[Tolstoy]

Quote: Originally Posted by Roggie

Why make it to where the super low overall guys already have the chance to lose the most overall? Shouldn't the higher up guys be able to lose more overall wise compared to the worst recruit? A bust 5 star should hurt more than a bust 1 star.

I agree with this. Otherwise it's a great system.

[devinewon]

Quote: Originally Posted by Colorado Cooler

Those of us who play one and two-star teams cannot access top recruits in this game. I dig through all the recruits who are interested, assign a numerical rating based upon attributes, pitch the best players I identify (yes, there are a few hidden gems in the bottom third of the list) and pitch 10-12 3-star guys who don't have my team in their top ten. Usually I wind up with a handful of those guys. It's a whole other world out there for players who try to build a C or lower rated team into a contender. Yes, the recruiting roulette leaves something to be desired, but the challenge is there for for those of us trying to make a go of it with the likes of North Texas and Idaho.

There are so many problems with this though. Why should you have to play with a crappy team to scout players? When you do build it up to a good program 15 years later you still will never be able to recruit with them effectively because you cant improve your facilities or your academic prestige and a few other stats thus you can be negative recruited easily and to be honest you won't even be in the top ten of most quality recruits.

[44drob]

Quote: Originally Posted by Roggie

Why make it to where the super low overall guys already have the chance to lose the most overall? Shouldn't the higher up guys be able to lose more overall wise compared to the worst recruit? A bust 5 star should hurt more than a bust 1 star.

Great point that you make i can digg !!!

[devinewon]

This was very evident in NCAA 2010 there are some big time QB's we had in our Online Dynasty that just didn't pan out.

Big Time Bust were in the game last year. Haven't seen one this year.

[jbrew2411]

Quote: Originally Posted by devinewon

This was very evident in NCAA 2010 there are some big time QB's we had in our Online Dynasty that just didn't pan out. Big Time Bust were in the game last year. Haven't seen one this year.

I know what you mean. In NCAA 10, using Miami, I landed the 10th best QB. He was a 4* with great speed and a good arm. Perfect to run my spreed or so I thought. In the same class was a 3* that I signed to be a back-up. Both red shirted and would not play until their RsSo year. I was going to use my 4* in some mop up roles his RsFr year. I had a Sr so didn't need him quite yet. Well the time the 4* player made it on the field he didn't perform. In fact I almost always pulled him. Then in the ACC title game my Sr goes down and I have to choose between the 4* or 3*. The 3* had not played at all. I decided to go with the 3* guy. He won the game for me and my BCS bowl. Went on to start for 3 years. He won a Heisman his senior year. He broke every school record. As for the 4* guy he transfered after his RsSo year to FIU. He got 1 year to play and didn't do anything. I played them that year and it was fun.

I never had that experience with NCAA 11. I had the same thing happen in NCAA 09 as well. I played 10 years into 2 different dynasties. I only had three 3*'s that could play day one. All 3 were DB's and in the top 15 for their position . Most all the 3*'s I had need 2 years of progression before they were ready. I could see a red shirt year then playing as RsFr but to be RsJr's before they can play a role is a little unreal to me.

[devinewon]

Quote: Originally Posted by jbrew2411

I know what you mean. In NCAA 10, using Miami, I landed the 10th best QB. He was a 4* with great speed and a good arm. Perfect to run my spreed or so I thought. In the same class was a 3* that I signed to be a back-up. Both red shirted and would not play until their RsSo year. I was going to use my 4* in some mop up roles his RsFr year. I had a Sr so didn't need him quite yet. Well the time the 4* player made it on the field he didn't perform. In fact I almost always pulled him. Then in the ACC title game my Sr goes down and I have to choose between the 4* or 3*. The 3* had not played at all. I decided to go with the 3* guy. He won the game for me and my BCS bowl. Went on to start for 3 years. He won a Heisman his senior year. He broke every school record. As for the 4* guy he transfered after his RsSo year to FIU. He got 1 year to play and didn't do anything. I played them that year and it was fun. I never had that experience with NCAA 11. I had the same thing happen in NCAA 09 as well. I played 10 years into 2 different dynasties. I only had three 3*'s that could play day one. All 3 were DB's and in the top 15 for their position . Most all the 3*'s I had need 2 years of progression before they were ready. I could see a red shirt year then playing as RsFr but to be RsJr's before they can play a role is a little unreal to me.

Yep its happened many many times especially at the skill positions. 3 stars can outstrip 4 stars at almost all the skill positions. I've built great o-lines out of 3 stars guys while people with Florida might have a bunch of 5 stars.