NCAA Football 11 Video: "Preliminary" Dynasty Team Ratings

[TheGamingChef]

Re: NCAA Football 11 Video: "Preliminary" Dynasty Team Ratings

I find this kind of comical... Iowa State has been 3* for as long as I can remember, and suffered through some pretty weak seasons. Then finally, they get a winning season and a bowl victory under the belts for the first time in a while!

And they fall to 2*. WTF?

[NDFan1029]

For everyone complaining about the stars:

The star totals for the team have absolutely nothing to do with how good a team is AT THIS POINT or the numbered ratings; it is purely based on that particular school's prestige and past program history OVERALL.

Think about it: if it were based on how good a team is right now, Notre Dame and Michigan wouldn't be 6 star programs, but the stars are based off of the entire school's history.

[jmik58]

Re: NCAA Football 11 Video: "Preliminary" Dynasty Team Ratings

Lol, Did anyone notice that UCF was overated again , having them as the best con-usa rated team over , ECU and Houston. Guess it helps to have EA in your backyard.

I didn't see their rating. UCF has a good defense this year but the offense should drag down a high rating. I can see them higher than ECU though, the Pirates should be down this year. Houston, SMU, and So Miss should be up there with UCF though.

[DaltonT4]

Re: NCAA Football 11 Video: "Preliminary" Dynasty Team Ratings

Using bowl games as an argument nowadays isn't saying much considering many teams with .500 records go to bowls. The fact is that Kentucky has been nothing more than a barely above .500 team if you take their records over the past 4 seasons. And of those past 4 seasons they haven't finished above 4-4 in the SEC. So 3* is right where they need to be.

I guess your right, 4 bowl games in a row is big by UK standerds, stars don't matter anyway, if you do good enough in dynasty they go up so 3* by 3 or 4 years you can be a 6*.

[dan_457]

Re: NCAA Football 11 Video: "Preliminary" Dynasty Team Ratings

For everyone complaining about the stars:

The star totals for the team have absolutely nothing to do with how good a team is AT THIS POINT or the numbered ratings; it is purely based on that particular school's prestige and past program history OVERALL.

Think about it: if it were based on how good a team is right now, Notre Dame and Michigan wouldn't be 6 star programs, but the stars are based off of the entire school's history.

It's actually more like a combination of the two, with recent success playing a large role, otherwise teams wouldn't change prestige raitings for 10+ years. Look at Boise state, i think they're a 5* star this year, and they don't even have any real historical prestige at all.

[bamaCT12]

I don't care what you "other" guys say but
Alabama's about to RUN THIS ****
WE SAID we were back EVEN when we went 7-6 in Saban's first year, and everybody laughed... but we knew we landed one of the best recruiting classes in history (named no. 8 all time by S.I.)
we were one quarter away for playin for a title in '08....then we landed another top class
and we finished in '09
and we will do it again
this is goin 2 be one of the sickest duo's in the history of all of sports...
and with guys like Malcolm Brown and Isaiah Crowell in town you can get used to it!!!
get your popcorn ready!!!!!
because another dynasty is coming

[TheGamingChef]

Re: NCAA Football 11 Video: "Preliminary" Dynasty Team Ratings

I do believe EA's policy for raising/lowering program prestige, etc. has to do with # of wins in a season and conference championships, etc.

I remember my team prestige going up after a 10 win season, after a conference championship, etc.

Maybe they're using some cryptic algorithm that is more than a gut feeling.

Clearly that's not the case... see Iowa State losing a star after a winning season with a bowl victory

[tswiatkowski]

Bama's QB was near horrible last year. Unless he turned into Sam Bradford over the summer, I dont think they're deserving of a 99 offense

McElroy played all right. He wasn't the greatest, but he could certainly manage a game at the very least. I would give Bama about a 93 on offense and maybe an 89 or 90 on D. I understand only one starter is returning but there is no way that they will see the dropoff people are calling for.

[jmik58]

Re: NCAA Football 11 Video: "Preliminary" Dynasty Team Ratings

Clearly that's not the case... see Iowa State losing a star after a winning season with a bowl victory

I said "after a 10 win season or conference championship."

I don't think anything is "clearly" understood in regards to prestige by anyone other than the person who programmed it into the game.

[TheGamingChef]

Re: NCAA Football 11 Video: "Preliminary" Dynasty Team Ratings

I said "after a 10 win season or conference championship."

I don't think anything is "clearly" understood in regards to prestige by anyone other than the person who programmed it into the game.

But it's not an algorithm affected by "# of wins in a season" as you alluded to. It seems very subjective to me. Unfortunately, it can't be edited like player ratings.

[Jakeness23]

Why's everybody downing my Tar Heels? I know their offense isn't GREAT, but it's decent and their defense is freaking incredible.

[tswiatkowski]

For everyone complaining about the stars:

The star totals for the team have absolutely nothing to do with how good a team is AT THIS POINT or the numbered ratings; it is purely based on that particular school's prestige and past program history OVERALL.

Think about it: if it were based on how good a team is right now, Notre Dame and Michigan wouldn't be 6 star programs, but the stars are based off of the entire school's history.

Then why is Boise State a 5* program? Why is UCF a 3*? MSU is a 3* program with 6 national championships in the past 50 years. Recently they haven't been so great, up until the improvements with Dantonio, but how would we be at the same level with UCF, or 2* below Boise State?

[jmik58]

Re: NCAA Football 11 Video: "Preliminary" Dynasty Team Ratings

But it's not an algorithm affected by "# of wins in a season" as you alluded to. It seems very subjective to me. Unfortunately, it can't be edited like player ratings.

I said maybe it's an algorithm....being very sarcastic.

You're basically debating me for throwing out thoughts/ideas as if I was presenting factual evidence. No one knows what criteria is being used, especially me.

[tswiatkowski]

I think Ea just assigns random ratings because they know the community will just edit them anyway.

Yes sir I completely agree. I usually just mess around with Michigan State's roster after getting an edited version from the community, but this year I think I will do most of the Big Ten and dabble a bit with other teams as well.

[jmik58]

Re: NCAA Football 11 Video: "Preliminary" Dynasty Team Ratings

Why do you keep saying "we"?
Are you on Alabamas team?

It's a basic psychological phenomenon where a person who is a fan of something associates him or herself with the team/institution when there is a favorable situation.

For example, most people will talk about their favorite team after a win by saying "We played well today."

Conversely, the same fan will disassociate from the team after a bad performance.

For example, most people will use the term "They" when referring to a negative aspect. "They couldn't get the offense going today."

I realize you were being facetious but I couldn't help myself