Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

[AuburnAlumni]

This is a welcome addition that not a lot of folks seem to have noticed when looking at the vids.

Even teams like Bama, etc. who are rated Top 5 in the game have backups that are more in the 75-79 range. Very refreshing to see this. Top rated players at certain positions are in the 92-94 range and not 99s. Excellent.

We all know how the old USC/Florida/Florida State rosters back in the day would have the 3rd string TE rated as an 88 overall.


Now obviously, the actual individual player ratings of many guys are a bit off, but that's not the point. Taken as a whole, I'm seeing a much broader range being used.


My only question is this. Will the CPU generated players be on the same level as the initial roster set? By that I mean...looking at some of the top rated true freshman in the game, such as Florida's Jeff Driskell and Auburn's Kiehl Frazier..both regarded as blue chip, Top 5 QBs....are 75 and 72 respectively. I have no problem with that at all. However, after year 1......will the CPU generated Top 5 QBs be rated in the mid 80s?

I'm hoping that since the initial roster ratings are lowered and more spread out, this falls in line with how the CPU generated recruits are created.

Our Online Dynasty group already plans on simming a few seasons to get a gauge on how the top true freshmen are rated.

If CPU generated recruits are still coming in at 80+, we'll go back through the initial roster set and rerate the top 2011 Freshmen accordingly.


But overall...well done EA. Thank you for using a wider range initially.

[schumj]

Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

Couldn't agree more. I think people are freaking out about missing players and stuff and sure there is a lot of work to make the rosters, but I like that the ratings are better spread out and will take that over good rosters where you have to re-do so many ratings.

[Wildcats302]

Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

This is a welcome addition that not a lot of folks seem to have noticed when looking at the vids.

Even teams like Bama, etc. who are rated Top 5 in the game have backups that are more in the 75-79 range. Very refreshing to see this. Top rated players at certain positions are in the 92-94 range and not 99s. Excellent.

We all know how the old USC/Florida/Florida State rosters back in the day would have the 3rd string TE rated as an 88 overall.


Now obviously, the actual individual player ratings of many guys are a bit off, but that's not the point. Taken as a whole, I'm seeing a much broader range being used.


My only question is this. Will the CPU generated players be on the same level as the initial roster set? By that I mean...looking at some of the top rated true freshman in the game, such as Florida's Jeff Driskell and Auburn's Kiehl Frazier..both regarded as blue chip, Top 5 QBs....are 75 and 72 respectively. I have no problem with that at all. However, after year 1......will the CPU generated Top 5 QBs be rated in the mid 80s?

I'm hoping that since the initial roster ratings are lowered and more spread out, this falls in line with how the CPU generated recruits are created.

Our Online Dynasty group already plans on simming a few seasons to get a gauge on how the top true freshmen are rated.

If CPU generated recruits are still coming in at 80+, we'll go back through the initial roster set and rerate the top 2011 Freshmen accordingly.


But overall...well done EA. Thank you for using a wider range initially.

Do you think we should ask the poster who has been posting so many vids of ratings, gameplay, etc, to test this out over a couple of years of dynasty in regards to incoming recruit ratings? Just a thought.

I agree with you, I like the stretched out ratings. I'm definitely going to be redshirting most of my backups that I legally can at Kentucky lol gonna take a while to build them up with our backups all in the 60s, but that makes it all the more fun when I do.

[illwill10]

Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

I really like that ratings are spread out. I was planing on lowering OVRs anyway, so it saves a ton of time. Hopefully Roster makers dont improve ratings anymore. 86+ Seem to be the studs now.
Last year John Brantley would have been 90. This year a 80. I am loving it. Besides a few 90+ players, I wont have to really mess with Overalls. But I will mess with some ratings like ACC, Pursuit, BCV, AGI, PRC, and Jump

[SeaOfRed75]

Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

This is great if

1) as stated, new recruits on average are rated similarly
2) progression is done so some of these top recruits are 94-95 by their junior or senior year
3) player ratings matter more especially on the line

lastly, I noticed a couple juco's on Nebraska's roster at least are rated too low. Hopefully this does not mean they reverted to the mistake they made in earlier versions of the game with jucos rated FAR too low. Jucos are immediate impact guys EA.

[illwill10]

Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

This is great if

1) as stated, new recruits on average are rated similarly
2) progression is done so some of these top recruits are 94-95 by their junior or senior year
3) player ratings matter more especially on the line

lastly, I noticed a couple juco's on Nebraska's roster at least are rated too low. Hopefully this does not mean they reverted to the mistake they made in earlier versions of the game with jucos rated FAR too low. Jucos are immediate impact guys EA.

I think that is the reason why ratings were stretched. I dont think recruits ovrs were changed much, so they wanted to streched out roster

[jfsolo]

Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

This is great if

1) as stated, new recruits on average are rated similarly
2) progression is done so some of these top recruits are 94-95 by their junior or senior year
3) player ratings matter more especially on the line

lastly, I noticed a couple juco's on Nebraska's roster at least are rated too low. Hopefully this does not mean they reverted to the mistake they made in earlier versions of the game with jucos rated FAR too low. Jucos are immediate impact guys EA.

Its always a guessing game. Sometimes you'll have a Lavonte David or a Dejon Gomes who blow up, and sometimes you'll have a Kenny Wilson or a Tyrell Spain who don't pan out.

[DaTwolves21]

Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

I wouldn't go that far, they probably just randomize them and go with it, I really doubt they have a roster guy, they just need to pay these college dudes so we can get a real representation of the players, enough is enough, no more tip toeing around the obvious, they are who we thought they were lol sorry back to my rant, Mr.Keller, you were horrible at arizona state and even worse at Nebraska, get over urself, u don't deserve anything. The o'bannon twins, u guys didn't cut it in the league, let us enjoy our college games. Sorry every1

[mrprice33]

Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

I wouldn't go that far, they probably just randomize them and go with it, I really doubt they have a roster guy, they just need to pay these college dudes so we can get a real representation of the players, enough is enough, no more tip toeing around the obvious, they are who we thought they were lol sorry back to my rant, Mr.Keller, you were horrible at arizona state and even worse at Nebraska, get over urself, u don't deserve anything. The o'bannon twins, u guys didn't cut it in the league, let us enjoy our college games. Sorry every1

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaanywayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy yy...the homogenizing of ratings has been a problem in this game for a while. Hopefully having lower ratings where needed (even when it draws the ire of homers) further differentiates the players so that their individual abilities stick out more.

[Palo20]

If the recruit ratings are the same as last year then these stretched ratings should be perfect.

Plus, didn't they add more in season progression? If that's the case the ratings needed to be lowered or everyone would be 90+ by mid season.

[fcboiler87]

Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

If the recruit ratings are the same as last year then these stretched ratings should be perfect.

Plus, didn't they add more in season progression? If that's the case the ratings needed to be lowered or everyone would be 90+ by mid season.

Yeah I think you're exactly right. I hated how recruits last year were terrible and none would make an impact for you unless they were a 5 star. I hope with the lowered and spread out ratings that if you're a small school and you land a decent 3 star that he can make an impact for you.

All in all, I have mixed feelings on this. I LOVED NCAA 10's ratings. I felt like things were very balanced. At least recruits came in at comparable ratings to existing players. It seems as though I'm in the minority around here on that, but I think it made things very competitive throughout the course of a dynasty. Hopefully, the lowered rosters with lower recruits will make for some exciting and competitive dynasty play in 12. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

[blkrptnt819]

Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

They really took a big step forward with these ratings. There are some curveballs (Ohio St's walkon OL, Donnie Evege at 87 ovr, Jordan Kovacs at 89 ovr, lol), but by and large this is pretty encouraging.

Now we need to see if the first year recruits dwarf the lowly rated underclassmen.

Evege is a CB.

[georgiafan]

Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

I agree with AA i'm pleased with it also after I soaked in that the top 100 recruit UGA just signed in real life was a 72 ovr. I'n still not getting excited until I see what the person below me said. Good news is this can be fixed with turner sets hopefully someone will test this out that has the game early.

This is great if

1) as stated, new recruits on average are rated similarly
2) progression is done so some of these top recruits are 94-95 by their junior or senior year

lastly, I noticed a couple juco's on Nebraska's roster at least are rated too low. Hopefully this does not mean they reverted to the mistake they made in earlier versions of the game with jucos rated FAR too low. Jucos are immediate impact guys EA.

[cap032]

Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

I think its great as long as the first group of recruits dont come in rated as highly as they did last year. If that happens, everybody will have about 10 FR starting in year 2 of their dynasty. lol. Bama signed the #1 OL, Cyrus Koundjio, and he is rated a 79 OVR which is great if the top OL recruits have the same rating each year.

[Playmakers]

Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

I like the OL and DL ratings that i saw they were both pretty realistic accept for the awareness of the offensive linemen way too many guys with poor overall awareness that will hurt the game for blitz pickups

The thing i didn't like was the abundance of DB's rated in the 90's

We all know there are very few great DB's in college or Pro.....not sure why EA flooded the default rosters with lots of 90+ corners and safeties.

But it could be a result of them really boosting up the Zone coverage ratings in order to make the Zone better this year

Overall though i think they did a good job of spreading out the ratings especially with speed and acceleration for Defensive Linemen those are way down from what i could see