FCS Teams for NCAA 11

[cparrish]

Quote: Originally Posted by sikolec

It might be a cool idea for a few of us to gather our thoughts together and make a sort of "template" in terms of ratings for players as well as school rankings. That way we can download each other's teams and know that the rankings and ratings are based off the same premise. Let me know if anyone might be interested in this...

I am interested.

[KleShreen]

I might try and do the entire GLIAC (D2) this year. cparrish, I'll have to check out your RMAC teams. I have a buddy who created a couple RMAC teams last year, he's a WR for Western State...he did a pretty good job with them.

[TheLeviticalLawKid3]

I'm in for doing FCS teams for NCAA 11 once the real Teambuilder 2.0 comes out. I'll do any of them I can get authentic logos and updated rosters for.

As for a template, I suggest sticking to the way FCS teams were rated back when they were on the game: D- overall for most, with D overall for the best five or six schools, maybe even a D+ somewhere...and, unlike most ones on NCAA 10's TeamBuilder are, with kickers that can hit a field goal longer than 35 yards. Just saying.

[cparrish]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheLeviticalLawKid3

I'm in for doing FCS teams for NCAA 11 once the real Teambuilder 2.0 comes out. I'll do any of them I can get authentic logos and updated rosters for. As for a template, I suggest sticking to the way FCS teams were rated back when they were on the game: D- overall for most, with D overall for the best five or six schools, maybe even a D+ somewhere...and, unlike most ones on NCAA 10's TeamBuilder are, with kickers that can hit a field goal longer than 35 yards. Just saying.

Are you saying they shouldn't have any kickers that can make field goals? Mesa State's kicker a year or two ago routinely hit 50+ field goals, and was around 80% for his career. It really depends on the school. As for the team rankings, I would say the top teams should be around a C, and then so on.

[TheLeviticalLawKid3]

That was worded wrong, I know.

What I meant was most FCS teams I download have awful kickers. And I know that's not true in real life.

[BamaBruce]

Just saying, but it is a possibility that UNA will move to FCS if the Arkansas schools leave the GSC...after that, who knows what could happen....

[cparrish]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheLeviticalLawKid3

That was worded wrong, I know. What I meant was most FCS teams I download have awful kickers. And I know that's not true in real life.

Oh ok. I would have to agree with you. That is why I would like to have some of us really take the time and make some great life-like FCS teams and conferences.

[sikolec]

Alright. Well let me start off with where I believe FCS teams should be sitting in terms of ratings and rankings.

Here is what I have come up for FCS teams in terms of player attributes:

Back-Ups: 65-75
Starters: 72-78
All-American Honorable Mentions: 78-82
All-American 2nd Team: 80-84
All-American 1st Team: 84-89
NFL Prospects: 88-94

As for Program Info:

Academic Prestige: F to A (Some FCS Schools have better academics than FBS; ex: Ivy League)

Campus Lifestyle: F to A (Some FCS schools have similar campus lifestyles to those of the best FBS schools)

Coach Experience: F to C (Maybe a few exceptions)

Coach Prestige: F to C-

Championship Contender: F to D

Athletic Facilities: F to C- (Exceptions? Any FCS schools have athletic facilities that compare to the best of FBS?)

Fan Base: F to C

Pro Potential: F to C-

Program Stability: F to C

Program Tradition: F to B

Television Exposure: F to C-


Again these are the ratings and ranges that I initially believe most FCS schools fall into. Feel free to modify, debate (agree or disagree) with anything above. Let's get this discussion going so we can have the most accurate FCS teams out there!