Coordinator Prestige

[Go Blue 26]

I'm not sure if this is an isolated incident, but I couldn't find anything, and it's fairly major, so I posted it here. Recently I decided to start a OC dynasty and by the end of the season I was a B+, I thought that was high, but I could deal. Then the file corrupted, so I started a new one, and realized that my prestige was jumping from a D- to a B+ when I advanced from preseason to week 1. I tested this with 1 and 2 star schools, OC and DC, and offline and online dynasty, and it's happening everytime for me.

Anyone else have this problem? It's not game breaking, but it really ruins the fun for a user trying to play a coordinator dynasty, because you get BCS HC offers after year 1.

Also, after more testing, it appears to be restricted to created coordinators. Which means you can get realistic results using an already existing coordinator.

[Aranor]

EA never worked on Coaching Carousel, so this year isn't any different. From some comments I've seen they say this years is even worse, so that's not surprising that you jump from D- to B+.

[TarHeelPhenom]

IMO EA's thought process is backwards when it comes to rating OC's and DC's. IMO your OC's and DC's should not be rated higher than your head coach. If you want to rate the coordinators like that then rate them according to all coordinators and not against head coaches. As it stands now because the coordinators are rated so high you have so many coaching changes.

[K0ZZ]

There are a few issues with CC.

One resigning should occur prior to new coaching hires, too many coaches are leaving when they'd be resigned to their old program.

Secondly, Coordinators and Head coaches are differentiated via prestige, since coordinator goals are almost always easier than HC, they gain prestige much faster.

I've seen much better logic but I've seen some crazy things as well, last year teams really wouldn't promote internally and I've seen it several times, 9 moves out of ten are fairly justifiable (EA only factors teams prestige into the equation, you'll see for example Mike Leach leaving Wazzou to coach at a MAC or CUSA school which is only justifiable buy the prestige rating).

They didn't change anything as in an extension of the feature, but they did seem to tighten up the logic a bit which is always nice. Coordinators do need to be overhauled though.

[Aranor]

Quote: Originally Posted by chicagopax

There are a few issues with CC. One resigning should occur prior to new coaching hires, too many coaches are leaving when they'd be resigned to their old program. Secondly, Coordinators and Head coaches are differentiated via prestige, since coordinator goals are almost always easier than HC, they gain prestige much faster. I've seen much better logic but I've seen some crazy things as well, last year teams really wouldn't promote internally and I've seen it several times, 9 moves out of ten are fairly justifiable (EA only factors teams prestige into the equation, you'll see for example Mike Leach leaving Wazzou to coach at a MAC or CUSA school which is only justifiable buy the prestige rating). They didn't change anything as in an extension of the feature, but they did seem to tighten up the logic a bit which is always nice. Coordinators do need to be overhauled though.

Are you serious? There are plenty on here who have said that they've been fired after being at a school for one season and having a winning season, but fired because he didn't do some goals. Do you think nick saban or les miles would be fired if they were supposed to will the natl championship but didn't make it? Of course not. Because they are good coaches and win games. No coach I have ever seen was fired in one year. The logic is unrealistic and terrible.

[rjsuperfly66]

The problem is partly due to the fact that there is no differentiation in the game modes.

To properly assess this, I always think College Hoops 2k8:

In 2k8, if you went into a closed legacy, you became the head coach at only a select number of schools (the worst ones in the game) and were therefore required to fulfill a number of tasks over your career to gain attribute points and move up the ranks. You were treated as a brand new coach, no one knew you, you were a rookie that had to earn your way up the ladder. A lot of these tasks were very challenging and required you to move to a top tier program (like get a #1 recruit, etc.). I liked that they were not a year to year thing, but rather points you would earn over time. In the end, your key was wins/losses/attendance year to year, and while getting the attribute points helped get better recruits and some better jobs, it was not a overhyped requirement, because the game understood it was all about the end result. It was pretty challenging to move up the later because if you moved up too fast, you would have a challenge in recruiting (not enough attribute points in charisma, etc.) and be facing tougher competition. You were also forced to wait 2 or 3 years to move on, realistic because one 20 win season at Lehigh wouldnt send you right to a solid mid-major or major conference program. I remember playing with Dartmouth, and in year 3 made the Elite 8. My best offer the next year was Davidson. They really wanted you to earn your way to the top, not just given a good one.

If you went into an open legacy, you took over any program you wanted and therefore took over an already established coach with his current attributes. It was easier to bounce around because if you were at Duke for example, you had Coach K at almost all A+s. But regardless, the only time you usually saw the coaches at top teams leave was if they retired, which was cool.

I feel like NCAA 13 just throws it all together, and therefore any time you create a coach, it's always almost assumed that you are already established. Therefore, playing a good season or two at a bad school as an OC already has you in position to get a very good HC job, quite unrealistic. In my first year at Kent St. as OC, I went 9-3 and lost my bowl game, yet I was received HC jobs and all mid-majors and OC jobs to all high-majors. I forced myself to go back and right now I'm #18 and 8-1. I should have to really establish myself before being given top jobs, yet I feel I will be receiving some high-major HC jobs with no HC experience in the next offseason, quite unrealistic. How many OC's from the MAC with no head coaching experience get major offers? Never.

Like OP, I had a B+ rating halfway thru year 1, while all other MAC coordinators have D's and I have better prestige then most HC's. Meanwhile, good coaches will be getting cut because they had a few bad seasons because their goals are very challenging. Those top coaches, there goals are like "Get a Top 5 recruiting class, win a NC, etc., win 80% conference games every year," which are much easier to fail. Those guys get dropped like flies while my guy will skyrocket up the ranks, its not right.

The biggest determining factor of HC should be Wins and Losses. Who cares about all the stupid stuff if your team goes 10-3 and wins their bowl game? You won't get fired for having the 55th ranked recruiting class if your team wins 10 games. Also in theory, just because your coach has an A+ rating doesn't mean his goals should get harder. He should actually have a longer leash in case he has a bad year or two because people know what kind of coach he can actually be. It's too easy to freefall into failure in this game, a major unrealistic issue.

I also think the carousel should be a little more immersive and interactive. Maybe interviews, etc. If you are a teams #1 target, they should treat you like it. Instead, you get a simple little popup that says accept or decline. Its so bland and boring.