Printable View
I would like to see this -http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colle...uri/52913250/1
No way the #1 recruit in the game would go to Missouri
Quote:
Dorial Green-Beckham, the consensus No. 1 recruit and USA TODAY's Offensive Player of the Year, stayed close to home Wednesday, commiting to Missouri.Green-Beckham, a 6-6, 220-pound wide receiver from Hillcrest (Springfield, Mo.), picked Missouri over Arkansas, Oklahoma, Alabama and Texas.
I was just looking at this guy and saw that he committed to Missouri, That I was thinking though was that I would want to see this,Quote:
Originally Posted by psuexv
Attachment 396
Sorry for those who don't know the key it is in order,
possession, speed, route running, catch in traffic.
I like it simply for the snapshot effect without me having to look at a ton of ratings I don't care about.
Is that from a video game, website, or what? I've never seen that setup before.Quote:
Originally Posted by oweb26
That's from ESPN U it was the #1 wR guy traits.
Sent from my A500 using Tapatalk
if they removed the ability to see every rating, except for the certain measurables, and had that on every recruit's info page, that'd be awesome!Quote:
Originally Posted by oweb26
FULLY AGREEQuote:
Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp
Theu could just show that and I would be good with it. That shows you what type of player you are getting without telling you everything about him. As of now, we know the strengths and weaknesses of every player and exactly how they are gonna play. That shouldnt be the case. It would be a great/bad feeling to get a WR that has the Stopwatch, Jumping, and YAC signs; and realize after you sign him and has a big drop habit and cant get his self open.
Too much predictability
It would obviously be less effort/impact, but could still require a significant amount of changing, unless you allowed the CPU to "cheat" and didn't force them to scout. Otherwise you're talking about a significant change to the interface, the flow, and to the AI logic.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp
Not that it should be a reason for them not to do it. I'm just saying that I have tons of ideas, but no idea of how much of the bath water we can throw out at the same time. It's easy to just list ideas without regard for what they cost .... I'm just not wired in a way that I can do that anymore. I just see budget spreadsheets and design documents floating through my head :D
( Not that it should stop you guys, or me, for that matter, from throwing out ideas. I'm just saying that I just can't do as simply anymore :D )
Been waiting all day to come on here and post that. There are no circumstances that I can think of where a #1 kid, even from Missouri, would commit to Mizzou in the game, over UT and Oklahoma. Nor come down to a final two of Missouri and Arkansas.Quote:
Originally Posted by psuexv
I've said in other threads that one thing I want to see is a "Dealbreaker" type thing where some recruits treat certain pitches as Absolutes. There are some things they absolutely want, and some things they absolutely don't. Ideally, I'd want to see it where if you try to pitch a recruit with a "Most + Dealbreaker" with a C- or whatever, then you'll actually lose points. It wouldn't quite work under the Russian Roulette style of recruiting, but it still could. Either way, the main point is that right now there's very little harm in hitting a "Most" - "C+". It doesn't give you as much points as a "Most" - "A+", obviously, but it still gives you something. I think that needs to change where top schools can't just spam every topic, but you actually have to line up with a recruit's desires.
Which brings me to the second point, or really with DGB, the main point. "Most" needs to mean more. If you line up a "Most" and "A+", like Mizzou and Arky would have had with "Proximity to Home" as A+/B+ (which is another topic for another time), you should absolutely be able to pull away from schools that can't pull that. Partially due to the roulette system, and partially due to the point values associated with it, you can't pull away (or make up ground quickly) in the current game with just one pitch lining up. You have to be solid across the board, with many pitches. And that inherently gives a Texas or Oklahoma or Ohio State an advantage in in-game recruiting. I'm not saying that those schools don't have that advantage in real life, but their true advantage, in my opinion, is that they have breadth. They can take 20 guys who have ten different #1 priorities and probably line up solidly on all ten of those priorities. But when you're Mizzou, and you have a guy who wants to stay home, you should be able to use that enough to make it count. And unless you're lucky enough to hit "Proximity to Home" on every call, that's simply not going to happen. Personally, I don't think returning to the old Spam style would work either, because the Texas/Oklahoma/Ohio State advantage was still true there too. But the point spread for different combinations should be increased, so the ability to pull away, or make up ground, under the right circumstances is increased.
But, we can agree that the product on the field is pretty close to being a great football game, though (of course there is always room for improvement, but, for the most part, the game plays pretty damn good) so if they spend most of the time fixing the things that are significantly screwed up in recruiting and dynasty stuff in general, I think it would be money and resources well spent. Anything that can be done to make recruiting more in depth and, therefore, more strategic is always a great thing in my opinion as that is an aspect of it that is sorely being missed. Recruiting is nothing but a chore right now and it's annoying beyond belief.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
Ehhhhhhh ... I wouldn't go quite that far. It's a good product, but there are some major pieces missing, especially on the O/D-Line.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
But yes, I agree with your basic premise. My post wasn't intended to discourage anything, just an acknowledgement that I have no idea what kind of money/time they'd be willing to spend on X, and since budgets and resources are a daily discussion at my work, I can't help but obsess with something like that.
the computer already cheats by knowing the recruit's potential. its why you see so many 4 and 5* recruits not talked to at all by the top cpu teams- because they have shitty potential and wont develop at all. it might be possible that the cpu already knows the recruit's interest in the school pitches, and if that's the case, then it doesnt matter if the cpu is forced to scout or not, since it already knows the interest of each pitch.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
completely agree. the dealbreakers are something that would impact recruiting a lot, and there are a couple of other "branches" that could be involved to really make that idea tree something fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
again, completely agree. imo, "high interest or better with B+ or higher school pitch" should yield a significantly higher point total. "high interest or better with C- or less school pitch" and "low interest or worse with B+ or higher school pitch" should yield negative points. anything between "low interest to above average interest combined with C to B school pitch" should hardly give/lost any points. this would drag out the recruiting process (another plus and it'd bring a ton of excitement to the offseason recruiting :nod:).Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
May have to disagree with this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by illwill10
At this level -- and we are 'playing' the game like we are an Alabama or USC or even a Western Ky. -- a coach is aware of, using your example, the guy's drops problem. He's been looked at in person, countless tapes of him have been watched, the HS coach has been talked to and even opposing HS coaches have been spoken to.
I would bet that there's not a single (applicable) attribute we see in our game for a guy like Dorial Green-Beckham that wasn't known IRL by Mizzou, Arky, and everyone else. OK, so maybe they don't know his Kick Power, but his CAT, CIT, SPC ratings, along with SPD, AGI, ACC, BCV, ELV, BTK, TRK, SPIN/JUKE, probably even his blocking footwork/power, are all pretty well fleshed out in the recruiting reports that these coaches -- and remember, we're playing at being on the same level 'in this game' -- have become knowledgable about.
Maybe I could go along with a 'hidden' asterisk in a category that becomes an area he just never improves on, or maybe solidifies the concept thrown about on all the forums about true duds/diamonds in the rough. But as for not knowing all these grades? I just have to think that Chizak IRL at Auburn or me at an Xbox Auburn are aware of these attributes.
IMO, the recruiting pitch (recruit's vs. ours) and the Russian Roulette of pitches are the concepts that need re-worked. Love the idea of a Most really meaning something (like w/ Green-Beckham and Prox Home) more than how it works in our game. I'm also still on my soapbox about a weighted roulette system where a recruit's Most category has 14x more chance of coming up than his Least. If Green-Beckham's Most was Prox Home and I rated a C there at Auburn, this pitch would come up often enough where I would eventually be losing out b/c it's coming up for Mizzou the same number of times and they're hammering the points, killing me.
1)Better recruiting/scouting/training by adding it as part of a school's budget (weekly time based on program prestige, coach prestige, coach recruiting rating, and % recruiting budget, also make all recruits not offered scholarships and those that are cut from the game added as walk-ons in the off-season)
2)Homecoming game and senior day/night for last home game of the season (specific pre-game presentation, specific in-game commentary, louder fans, more attendance, and biggest impact on visiting recruits)
3)New recruiting pitches(Coaching style, Bragging rights by state, by conference, by rival, and by BCS champion, conference title contender, minor bowl game participant, and major bowl game participant) and get rid of off-season recruiting all together replaced by post-season recruiting (weeks 15-18) with National Signing Day show in off-season where the recruit will actually hard commit to your school with some top guys flip flopping to another top 3 school. Soft commits show a meter with filled up levels of commitment(low meter= solid chance he may uncommit(maybe 25% chance of picking another school), medium filled meter= low chance he may commit elsewhere (say 10%), and completely filled meter= 0% chance of going elsewhere.
4)More true prospects for recruiting (increase the number of 2 and 3 star prospects only by eliminating the 1 star category all together- make a small % of 2 and 3 star prospects that are hidden gems(came in as a Fr. 63 Ovr but makes huges strides in the off-seasons so after 3 years he is an 90 Ovr as a Sr.) as well as a small % of 4 and 5 star prospects as busts(actually only increase from their initial rating from 0-3 pts over their careers-say he came in as a 77 but only left as an 80)
5)Post bowls All-Star game (HS all-star game for the top players at their position with a few announcements (5 min. quarters)
6)New scouting feature- In addition to what scouting told you in last gen with more accurate workout #'s, the new scouting feature informs you of a prospect's HS G.P.A., more accurate height and weight, all positions he played in high school, player devotion level to school and head coach, and his top pitch he is most interested in and least interested pitch. End of Off-season recruiting phase adds the ability to send a letter to 50 prospects max which can result in a recruit having new Top 10 interests once the season starts if he receives letters from other schools not in the game's auto generated list. Have the game give you feedback during the pre-season when you build your recruiting board with arrows showing the impact of your letters of interest with the 50 recruits.
7)Slot machine recruiting upgrades(You select a Recruiting Coordinator (HC, OC, or DC) who then decides his recruiting plan for each position group and assigns coaches to recruit that particular position with the top 3 pitches for your school pertaining to that position during pre-season and each recruit has a recruiting plan as well based on their prestige, position, and location)
8)Slot machine recruiting tweaks (increase the likelihood of getting a coach's choice to 1/3 of the time so in a 60 minute phone call I will be guaranteed two topics that I am interested in pitching, add in a player's choice that shows up around 1/3 of the time that chooses only a prospects' above avg, high, very high, and most interested pitches, and finally the last 1/3 can be random poor topics which will allow for the unplanned bad call(least, very low, low, avg, as well as your schools lower c or d graded areas).
9)(Paired with #6)Near the end of the off-season the next recruiting class is generated rather than in the pre-season starting at the end of year 1(Each team is allowed to send out up to 50 Letters of Interest and scout up to 25 players in the off-season)(Letters of interest can be sent to any prospect but don't expect a 5* stud to be automatically interested in you if you're a low prestige school just because you sent them a letter saying you're interested in them, criteria for showing up in a prospect's top 10 in the pre-season is based on many factors(Prospect prestige, Team prestige, Coach prestige, Recruiting rating of head coach, Location, Team needs, Player pitch preferences, and the overall amount of letters that prospect receives from teams) scouting of players will show that players hidden potential(in the form of letter grades F=very poor(4 years progression range 0-4) D=bad (range 5-9) C=Avg (10-14) B=good (15-20) A=Excellent(20-30) (Example: 2* hidden gem with excellent potential comes in as a Fr 63 Ovr will be in the range of 83-93 Ovr as a (RS) Sr., or say you got a 5* bust with F potential came in at 82 Ovr as a (RS) Sr he would be just 82-86 Ovr), discipline(on the field(examples: mental penalties like false start and getting burned on PA passes) off-field grades will be shown(likelyhood a player will commit an infraction(team or academic), examples:cheating on an exam(academic) or skipping practice(team), true height and weight(hgt and wgt shown on an unscouted prospect may be +/- 2 in off in hgt and +/- 20 lbs, and HS stat updates after each HS game, and HS G.P.A. (awareness indicator and academics pitch indicator).
As I said this is more of what I would like to see by NCAA 15, but if some of these ideas could be added earlier then that would be great.
you're exactly right......but only because that player has been scouted by coaches/recruiting analysts....and even then, the coaches/recruiting analysts have spent a ton of time watching the recruit play in order to get an idea of what the recruit is capable of. as ncaa recruiting currently stands now, you're able to know every important rating the very first time you look at a recruit. no coach on the planet, could tell what any recruit specializes in just by looking at him for the first time ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by WarEagle
Quote:
Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp
I didnt fully think it out before I wrote it.Quote:
Originally Posted by WarEagle
I agree that A coach knows every thing about a player.
I would like there to be actual scouting. Not like Madden, but something similar. I would like to get a email of the recruits ratings. This is where Scouts can come to play. Where you could ask scouts to "get some tape" on the player and send you an email back giving ratings back. Depending on the scouts grade, the more or less ratings you get back.
A coach doesnt know much about the players until the player is scouted. If anything, physical ratings should only be seen before the player is scouted.
not from day 1, he doesnt. the only time he's able to fully know everything about a recruit, is after spending hours scouting him, which is usually near the middle/end of the player's recruitment.Quote:
Originally Posted by illwill10
definitely agree with this.Quote:
Originally Posted by illwill10
I meant to put the paragraphs together.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp
I meant a coach knows everything about a player once the player is fully scouted.
It kind of takes out the fun out knowing all the ratings and knowing how they are going to play.
I think it would be cool to see a press conference and a signing day in the game. Also, i would like to see a deeper scouting system. I feel that the system now is kinda basic. Finally, why not the Under Armour All American game? (For the top athletes for there respective postions) That would also be pretty good to see. If players did not making the UA All star game, have state high school all american games.
:+1:Quote:
Originally Posted by WarEagle
Absolutely. That's definitely another option for what I was saying about increasing the "Most" value. And one that I have also advocated in the past, but probably forgotten about by now. If you kept the point values where they are now, but made it so that "Most", "Very High", etc have a significantly higher chance of coming up, then I think you could have the equivalent, or maybe even an improvement, over my idea.
just a random question, but why arent there any minus grade's for the pitches? its all base letters and +'s.