Statistical Look at Progression (Ongoing)

[cts]

It's tough to judge progression solely based on OVR, because OVR doesn't really tell the whole story. They could have adjusted the OVR formula and jacked up a couple of positions.

I know plenty of you have seen 95+ players that really weren't worth jack...and lower rated players that were better than their OVR suggests.

I'm with ND, I'm more interested in the team ratings...that at least shows the distribution of talent.

[NDAlum]

Quote: Originally Posted by EvanRG

Updated through season 4. Definitely a substantial increase in amount of 90+ players, but there was actually a decrease in 99 overalls. Major increases occured in the 93-90 range which helped propel the numbers back to 300+. By the way, ND Alum, to be honest it would cost me an extra 10-20 minutes to try to sort the team ratings but I am keeping track of the number of A+ teams and D teams for you.

Sounds good I appreciate whatever you can do!

[aliefallstar]

I know its early (and only one sim) but maybe its playing out like some others on here wanted. Here is my theory, bear with me.

The first season a guy is in the program he gets a big boost (thats why everyone has such a big boost bc year 1 everyone is "new"). Each year after they get a progressively smaller boost. This would account for the drop of after year three.

On the default rosters, Jrs and Srs are get "fr" and "soph" type boosts and thats why the overalls are so high in the first years.

Under this theory, progression would just correct itself after year 2. Again this is a theory based upon the first set of numbers presented in this thread.

[Rendezvous]

One of the main reason for a big drop off after year 3 is the large about of highly rated sophomores on the default roster I'm pretty sure.

[EvanRG]

Quote: Originally Posted by Smith.0

It's tough to judge progression solely based on OVR, because OVR doesn't really tell the whole story. They could have adjusted the OVR formula and jacked up a couple of positions. I know plenty of you have seen 95+ players that really weren't worth jack...and lower rated players that were better than their OVR suggests. I'm with ND, I'm more interested in the team ratings...that at least shows the distribution of talent.

Team ratings are tough to track because I have no way to sort the ratings that make it a quick process, but after year four there were 4 A+ teams and around 10-20 A, A- teams. I counted 4 D teams and 6-10 D+ teams.

Sorry it's not exact, but I'm mostly looking at overall ratings of players and coaching prestige and the addition of team ratings adds about 15-20 minutes of extra work.

[Mtneer08]

Quote: Originally Posted by uofm1508

Just a few questions if you don't mind answering them Is there a position(s) that is/are dominating the 90+ ratings? For the high ranked Qb's could you maybe look at the throw power, throw accuracy and awareness of a few and post those ratings? Not every season but maybe every 3 or 4 seasons look at the top 3 ranked Qb's and post those numbers

I would like this also.

[Mtneer08]

Looks like its going to be too much of an even playing field with all the 90+ rated players in year 4 and on. I just wish EA would make the players ratings like college hoops 2k8. Im still playing that game because the recruting is so perfect and i dont even like college basketball that much.

[EvanRG]

Quote: Originally Posted by Mtneer08

Looks like its going to be too much of an even playing field with all the 90+ rated players in year 4 and on. I just wish EA would make the players ratings like college hoops 2k8. Im still playing that game because the recruting is so perfect and i dont even like college basketball that much.

Wait until about season 10, trust me, this will probably ebb and flow each year.