FCS NCAA Football 14 Team Directory Project

[servo75]

Quote: Originally Posted by ledellburkhead

Team Completed Attachment 63453 Dartmouth Big Green Key Players HB #29 Dominick Pierre LB #33 Michael Runger SS #11 Garrett Waggoner LB #36 Bronson Green WR #2 Ryan McManus link: http://www.easports.com/teambuilder#...070:1372167512 gamertag: ledellburkhead timestamp PS3: 7/20/13 10:30am extra info: alt helmet is just a custom helmet

Maybe thicken the jersey #? I might suggest single outline white+white.

[Big T120588]

Quote: Originally Posted by servo75

Maybe thicken the jersey #? I might suggest single outline white+white.

a single outline would look like this



but two outline gives you this

[servo75]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big T120588

a single outline would look like this but two outline gives you this

Interesting... I think that the single outline, while it LOOKS like there's a gap in Teambuilder, still comes out solid when loading it in the game (at least on PS3)

[lakeytw]

Quote: Originally Posted by mrlux

Hey guys, I have been working on this formula calcualtion to help us streamline our team ratings (offensive, defensive, and team overall). This scale is open for feedback and can be adjusted in many ways until we come to a majority decision on the final scale. Breakdown of the scale categories: All stats from FCS Rank - FCS Def Rank were taken from Compughterratings which is a credible source that ranks all NCAA divisions in various statistical categories all the way down to NAIA. FCS Rank - Final ranking based on the 2012 season Wins/Loss - Final record based on the 2012-2013 season FCS Off Rank - Offensive Ranking (the lower the number the better the offense) FCS Def Rank - Defensive Ranking (the lower the number the better the defense) (Rating) Off - The NCAA14 rating equivalent based on formula (Rating) Def - The NCAA14 rating equivalent based on formula (Rating) Team - What the team average overall "should" be in the game. Pass % - Update pass % based on the 2012 season. What I did was take Compughterratings rankings for Offense and Defense and convert that into a "Rating" for us to give each team on both sides of the ball. The team rating is just the average of the offense and defense which may/may not match in the game. I also have the updated pass % for use as well. I decided to do this as I am seeing more concern regarding player/team ratings. This purpose of this scale is to help guide our new contributors to the project as well as level set us veterans so we are all on the same playing field, no pun intended . Again, this is a proposal at this point so that we are ALL working from a common scale and if we begin to look at each team holistically, it will help at the micro level on rating individual players. Please provide your feedback and let me know if it looks fair or if adjustment need to be made.

I like the idea, it would be nice if we could compare the strength of schedule in some way. Power conferences tend to beat each other up in the win / loss column. Quality of wins and or horrible losses should weigh into this somehow.

One other concern is that for most FCS teams, success is somewhat cyclical. Good years come every three to five seasons. Most schools, excepting the powerhouses, don't reload. They are successful after two or three recruiting classes mature under stable coaching. So overall ratings based on last years success may result in teams being overrated or underrated.

[Big T120588]

Quote: Originally Posted by servo75

Interesting... I think that the single outline, while it LOOKS like there's a gap in Teambuilder, still comes out solid when loading it in the game (at least on PS3)

Hey, yeah you're right. After all the teams I made you'll think I would have known that.

[servo75]

Quote: Originally Posted by mrlux

Hey guys, I have been working on this formula calcualtion to help us streamline our team ratings (offensive, defensive, and team overall). This scale is open for feedback and can be adjusted in many ways until we come to a majority decision on the final scale. Breakdown of the scale categories: All stats from FCS Rank - FCS Def Rank were taken from Compughterratings which is a credible source that ranks all NCAA divisions in various statistical categories all the way down to NAIA. FCS Rank - Final ranking based on the 2012 season Wins/Loss - Final record based on the 2012-2013 season FCS Off Rank - Offensive Ranking (the lower the number the better the offense) FCS Def Rank - Defensive Ranking (the lower the number the better the defense) (Rating) Off - The NCAA14 rating equivalent based on formula (Rating) Def - The NCAA14 rating equivalent based on formula (Rating) Team - What the team average overall "should" be in the game. Pass % - Update pass % based on the 2012 season. What I did was take Compughterratings rankings for Offense and Defense and convert that into a "Rating" for us to give each team on both sides of the ball. The team rating is just the average of the offense and defense which may/may not match in the game. I also have the updated pass % for use as well. I decided to do this as I am seeing more concern regarding player/team ratings. This purpose of this scale is to help guide our new contributors to the project as well as level set us veterans so we are all on the same playing field, no pun intended . Again, this is a proposal at this point so that we are ALL working from a common scale and if we begin to look at each team holistically, it will help at the micro level on rating individual players. Please provide your feedback and let me know if it looks fair or if adjustment need to be made. The image below is sorted by "Team Rating", teams shown in green denote the teams that have been completed already for comparison. The sooner we decide on a team rating scale, the sooner we can go back and update the teams that have been created. The "(Rating) Team" is the max threshold, it is ok if your team is a point lower in overall rating but if they are a point higher, they will need to be adjusted. Again, feedback is welcomed.

Sounds good! I'm pretty handy with numbers and statistics so let me know if you need help! The one question I have is that when you're building a team in Teambuilder, you don't get an overall team rating, just individual players (or is it someplace I'm not seeing?).

[mrlux]

Quote: Originally Posted by lakeytw

I like the idea, it would be nice if we could compare the strength of schedule in some way. Power conferences tend to beat each other up in the win / loss column. Quality of wins and or horrible losses should weigh into this somehow. One other concern is that for most FCS teams, success is somewhat cyclical. Good years come every three to five seasons. Most schools, excepting the powerhouses, don't reload. They are successful after two or three recruiting classes mature under stable coaching. So overall ratings based on last years success may result in teams being overrated or underrated.

Compoughterratings already factors strength of schedule in their rankings, that's why you see a team like Northern Iowa rated as a 68 OVR even though they had a 5-6 record. As for the overall ratings, I completely understand your point but for the sake of our community project we need a standard for everyone to follow because some may not know how to factor in certain parameters. The main reason we have to look at how a team performed last season is primarily because we have data to support how good/bad/average a team has been otherwise we would base everything off assumption and that could compromise the integrity of the project. I agree with your points regarding success at the FCS level but its a tricky thing to balance and make fair for this project. I know there can be key changes to a team that can possibly increase/decrease their listed rating, we can certainly review them on a case by case basis to ensure that the right decisions are being made.

Quote: Originally Posted by servo75

Sounds good! I'm pretty handy with numbers and statistics so let me know if you need help! The one question I have is that when you're building a team in Teambuilder, you don't get an overall team rating, just individual players (or is it someplace I'm not seeing?).

You have to import that team into the game to get the Offense, Defense and Team Overall ratings, unfortunately Teambuilder doenst provide that data.

[lakeytw]

Quote: Originally Posted by mrlux

Compoughterratings already factors strength of schedule in their rankings, that's why you see a team like Northern Iowa rated as a 68 OVR even though they had a 5-6 record. As for the overall ratings, I completely understand your point but for the sake of our community project we need a standard for everyone to follow because some may not know how to factor in certain parameters. The main reason we have to look at how a team performed last season is primarily because we have data to support how good/bad/average a team has been otherwise we would base everything off assumption and that could compromise the integrity of the project. I agree with your points regarding success at the FCS level but its a tricky thing to balance and make fair for this project. I know there can be key changes to a team that can possibly increase/decrease their listed rating, we can certainly review them on a case by case basis to ensure that the right decisions are being made.

I agree with the idea of having an index of approximate ratings that we use as guidelines for the project. Perhaps we should add another column or two to the table for actual ratings of created teams?