Player Progression in NCAA Football 12

[Draxion]

I would like for them to have a college hoops type progression system. Have the overall rating and then have potential A-F. Add in a coaches development rating and I would be happy. If they added that Madden player swing thing, I would be very happy haha.

[PaperBoyx703]

Quote: Originally Posted by blkrptnt819

The Madden swings are based on a consistency rating. The most a player can swing is 10pts and that's if they are the most incosistent.

Quote:

OS: So I know you guys are keeping “dynamic player progression” somewhat under wraps until around E3, but can you talk about how it affects Franchise mode at least? Looman: Yeah, dynamic player performance as a whole is a gigantic new feature for the whole game, but I can talk about the aspect that is exclusive only to Franchise mode. There are going to be two new traits that sort of define how this all works. And I know when people first read about it they’re going to think this is not that big of a deal, but it really does change Franchise mode more than any other feature we have ever added to it, so it’s really a huge deal. There’s two traits, confidence and consistency, that play a huge part in Franchise mode now. Players are going to be rated anywhere between one of four levels of consistency. So Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are going to be at the highlest level of consistency. Guys like Cutler or Tarvaris Jackson -- guys you never know what’s going to happen with when you turn on a game basically -- will not be as consistent. So week to week, depending on their performance last week, their confidence is going to be updated. Let’s say Cutler throws for 400 yards, three touchdowns and has the highest confidence, when you get to the next game he is going to have a huge ratings swing. Now, let’s say in our default rosters he is an 85 overall. If his confidence is really high, his ratings could go up to a 90 or a 92. If he has a bad game the week before, his rating could drop down to a 75 or a 73. The key thing to remember about this is that, regardless of whether they are hot or cold, every player’s ratings no matter the confidence level will change every single week.

It can go more than 10 pts according to Looman and no matter what they will change, and its based of performance of your last game factors in too so if your 5* star WR(This if it is put into NCAA 12, which is a possibility) has a good game and then doesnt get thrown to as much and has a poor game then his ratings will go down. And since these are college kids most shouldnt have the confidence and consistancy of a Brady or a Manning per say. So realistically the kids in NCAA should have more frequent drops and spikes in the progression of the season.

But then Also with this progression players can actually lose ratings and actually regress instead on only progressing. So I really do hope they got this into NCAA or atleast will get it in.

[mattbooty]

The only thing they would have to watch is too much degression. I don't remember what year it was, but one version of Madden the progression was based heavily on playing time, which caused a major problem for backups. Essentially I could draft an LB in the first round to be the eventual successor to my aging MLB, he obviously would have limited playing time the first year or two because he's a backup (in theory still learning the system, getting acclimated to the pro game), but in that version of madden his ratings started dropping because he didn't have any meaningful stats. It got to the point where draft picks were worthless unless they started in their first year (which is rare in the NFL).

I love the idea of dynamic progression but I think degression needs to be limited (but not eliminated). I would like to see some degression due to injuries, but other than that I would rather it stay at limited progression versus a player's rating actually going down.

What would be great is if they brought the on-campus type stuff back and make it so you could see what players were making it to practice, weight room, etc, and maybe have sliders to budget their time (so Bob Jones is struggling in the classroom, you have to budget more of his time to studying or risk him getting benched for academic reasons, but with less practice time he see's less progression)... this allows a more realistic progression (not stat based) without forcing people to play out the monotony of practice.

[TMJOHNS18]

I wish the ratings were more associated with players being in college and not just being great in the game. Ratings like speed, agility, jump can progress slowly, players bodies are still changing but I don't think rushing 1,500 yards should warrant a freak leap in a persons athleticism.

Also, ratings like catch, play recognition, accuracy should be low, very low, for recruits. There's great HS's out there, but even these top 150 recruits need to learn at the college level and this should reflect in ratings. Schools with better coaching staff could increase the rate players learn, but this should be progressive in a way that they may become better during the offseason, but also during the season. If you start a freshman QB because your senior is hurt, he should be gain more points every game he plays because he is getting experience. Thats the one thing I think is lacking in the game, the importance of experience.

Other then QB's plays being squiggly, experience doesn't really seem to matter. If I have a Senior CB, who starter all 12 games every year, a freshman can walk on the field and be better all around than him, simply because he was a great high school player. Not to say this shouldn't happen, but players with game experience should be a factor that you weigh over another athletic ability.

Freshman in the game should never be above 60 OVR, even the rare awesome recruits. Physical ability, coaching, and experience should help develop these players. The more they play, the more they gain in their position ability. This doesn't mean that they should be 90's if they play 4 years, other ratings that shouldn't change much (athletic ones and some non position ratings) should dictate where they may end up. A guy may have amazing raw talent for a Tackle, but he may be rated low because of poor coaching and less playing time. Maybe he's a player you can pick up in Madden and develop him even more.

Along with this, I wish ratings made a better transition from NCAA to Madden. If NCAA was rated players the same as Madden, then having a 95 WR means he'll be a 90ish rookie WR in Madden. And if this was the case, you'll only see maybe a couple 90 OVR players every few years, because these are the rare once in 10 years players. Potential other 1st rounders may be in the 80's OVR, but the rest of players are in the mid 70's or lower. This can help make unique players really impact their team (real impact players who help bring your program to a new level) and also help to make it so you don't have teams like Alabama loaded with 90 OVR players who just beast up everyone they see.

[Thinking Out Loud]

Quote: Originally Posted by TMJOHNS18

I wish the ratings were more associated with players being in college and not just being great in the game. Ratings like speed, agility, jump can progress slowly, players bodies are still changing but I don't think rushing 1,500 yards should warrant a freak leap in a persons athleticism. Also, ratings like catch, play recognition, accuracy should be low, very low, for recruits. There's great HS's out there, but even these top 150 recruits need to learn at the college level and this should reflect in ratings. Schools with better coaching staff could increase the rate players learn, but this should be progressive in a way that they may become better during the offseason, but also during the season. If you start a freshman QB because your senior is hurt, he should be gain more points every game he plays because he is getting experience. Thats the one thing I think is lacking in the game, the importance of experience. Other then QB's plays being squiggly, experience doesn't really seem to matter. If I have a Senior CB, who starter all 12 games every year, a freshman can walk on the field and be better all around than him, simply because he was a great high school player. Not to say this shouldn't happen, but players with game experience should be a factor that you weigh over another athletic ability. Freshman in the game should never be above 60 OVR, even the rare awesome recruits. Physical ability, coaching, and experience should help develop these players. The more they play, the more they gain in their position ability. This doesn't mean that they should be 90's if they play 4 years, other ratings that shouldn't change much (athletic ones and some non position ratings) should dictate where they may end up. A guy may have amazing raw talent for a Tackle, but he may be rated low because of poor coaching and less playing time. Maybe he's a player you can pick up in Madden and develop him even more. Along with this, I wish ratings made a better transition from NCAA to Madden. If NCAA was rated players the same as Madden, then having a 95 WR means he'll be a 90ish rookie WR in Madden. And if this was the case, you'll only see maybe a couple 90 OVR players every few years, because these are the rare once in 10 years players. Potential other 1st rounders may be in the 80's OVR, but the rest of players are in the mid 70's or lower. This can help make unique players really impact their team (real impact players who help bring your program to a new level) and also help to make it so you don't have teams like Alabama loaded with 90 OVR players who just beast up everyone they see.

This touches on a major "head scratcher" about EA, the lingering disconnect between some NCAA and Madden systems. I don't understand the seemingly "forced" attempts, at inventing ways to make this two games different from each other. Implementing the simple nuances, unique to actual collegiate and professional football, would be enough.

Ratings categories should be EXACTLY the same in both EA football games and most player ratings values, in both games, should have the EXACT same standard, except for OVR and AWR.

For example, A Sr QB in NCAA with 92THP/70THA/70TAS/70TAM/70TAD could have a 90OVR/95AWR because he is elite among colligiate players and has a high collegiate football IQ. However, that same Sr QB imported over to Madden, would keep those EXACT same ratings of 92THP/70THA/70/TAS/70TAM/70TAD but would have a 69OVR/55AWR because he is average among professional players and has to learn about the professional level.

[buckeye02]

I hope that you can edit any players ratings within the dynasty at any point in time. This will solve any issue's with progression that there may be.

[TMJOHNS18]

Quote: Originally Posted by Thinking Out Loud

For example, A Sr QB in NCAA with 92THP/70THA/70TAS/70TAM/70TAD could have a 90OVR/95AWR because he is elite among colligiate players and has a high collegiate football IQ. However, that same Sr QB imported over to Madden, would keep those EXACT same ratings of 92THP/70THA/70/TAS/70TAM/70TAD but would have a 69OVR/55AWR because he is average among professional players and has to learn about the professional level.

Yup, this really is annoying when using NCAA draft classes and the majority of QB after a few years are horrid. At least you can edit in Madden now, but like you said, those ratings should be static because they should reflect his ability to throw a football and shouldn't change when going pro.

[White Out]

I consider myself to be one of few people who make this a priority to determine each year. What is the progression like?

The problem with NCAA in the last few years has been they release the game with catastrophic glitches that make a dynasty very hard to play or stick with.

I'm honestly considering not buying the game for at least a month after release