NCAA Football 12 Dynasty Info Q&A thread

[Treadstone6700]

I actually saw Texas do another 5-7 season in year two or three, they fired the coach.

I did a Carousel one time with Nebraska as the DC. Year one, they went 12-1. Year two, 6-7.

I also believe Oregon had a sub .500 season or right at .500 and fired their coach as well. So big schools will cut ties.

Wow. That's awesome. Exactly what I was hoping CC would accomplish. I love simming seasons and playing maybe 1 game a year, I love recruiting and the ever evolving college football landscape. In one of my NCAA 11 dynasties I got to the year 2042 and all the National Championships had been won by about 6-7 schools (Nick Saban had over 15 I think). CC is a HUGE addition.

Thanks for the forums here too, you guys have done a great job with the Q&A and it's really appreciated

[JBHuskers]

Wow. That's awesome. Exactly what I was hoping CC would accomplish. I love simming seasons and playing maybe 1 game a year, I love recruiting and the ever evolving college football landscape. In one of my NCAA 11 dynasties I got to the year 2042 and all the National Championships had been won by about 6-7 schools (Nick Saban had over 15 I think). CC is a HUGE addition.

Thanks for the forums here too, you guys have done a great job with the Q&A and it's really appreciated

You're welcome sir! Thanks for being part of the community!

[Dr Death]

I actually saw Texas do another 5-7 season in year two or three, they fired the coach.

I did a Carousel one time with Nebraska as the DC. Year one, they went 12-1. Year two, 6-7.

I also believe Oregon had a sub .500 season or right at .500 and fired their coach as well. So big schools will cut ties.

I will say this about CC... they better leave :Penn_State: alone. Joe Pa has been their coach since I've been alive and will probably be there long after I'm gone! :D I will be mad if in year two of my dynasty I see they fired him. :fp:

[JBHuskers]

I will say this about CC... they better leave :Penn_State: alone. Joe Pa has been their coach since I've been alive and will probably be there long after I'm gone! :D I will be mad if in year two of my dynasty I see they fired him. :fp:

:D no, but I do see him retire within one to two years into the CC

[Deuce]

Guessing it can't be talked about yet but do we know what 'Teambuilder Roster Share' is? It was shown in one of the earlier videos but haven't heard anything about it since.

[JBHuskers]

Guessing it can't be talked about yet but do we know what 'Teambuilder Roster Share' is? It was shown in one of the earlier videos but haven't heard anything about it since.

I honestly don't know. I would assume it's what the name says it is....but I have not heard about this. Which video are you speaking of?

[Deuce]

I honestly don't know. I would assume it's what the name says it is....but I have not heard about this. Which video are you speaking of?

Gamerlivetv...Third box on the right.

[JBHuskers]

Someone else may know more than I do about that. Well I hope so, since I don't know anything in regards to TeamBuilder Roster Share :D

[GatorBait06NC]

As Ive posted in many other places, not being able to fully edit players in dynasty mode is a deal breaker for me at the current moment. Im making valid, intelligent posts about this. So theres no need to take shots at me for the way I feel about this game. Ive bolded and colored the strong points. Get mad at me if you want, but you know im right.

Unless they make some much need changes to recruiting and progression or allow us to edit players full to correct all the errors in realism made by bad progression and recruiting logic, I wont be getting the game. Why do they keep claiming how they want to make the game as real as possible, but their entire recruiting system and progression system is a JOKE.

Me and buckeye02 have done rosters for the last 3 years and this year we are getting the game a week early. Meaning that we could have fully named rosters and coaches done before release date.

But Im going to pass on the game and just wait for a much better game, called Madden 12. I just can deal with all the unrealistic crap that comes along with the problems in Dynasty mode, LIKE:
-The top 100 being littered with too many JUCOs,
-Top schools cant sign enough players or any back up players so they end up signing really bad overall players to fill their roster or take walk ons. Teams like Florida or Ohio State end up with players on their rosters in the 50s overall. Which harms on down the road.
-Teams signing too many Quarterbacks, all within the same range overall. Im tired of seeing teams with 12 QBs.
-In last years game, me and buckeye tested this. The AI controlled Ohio State, during dynasty was signing an average of 6 JUCO players each year, with some of them being terrible low star prospects. Like a JUCO WR as a 58 overall. Ohio State has no business signing a player that lowly rated. And teams like Ohio State sign 1 to 2 JUCOs a year in real life. NOT SIX!
-Boise State signs a ton of 5 star prospects allowing them to crush teams in the WAC and now, Mount West. In real life, Boise State signed ONE 4* prospect, no 5 stars.
-Offseason recruiting just has new 5* players show up out of nowhere, never having been recruited before. THATS NOT REALISTIC!!! AT ALL

And the big dagger is progression.
-In season progression was busted and pretty much a joke. No one cares to see a guy who is having a breakout year progress 1 to 2 points a year. Thats pointless. He needs a bigger boost than that.
-Recruiting was manipulated into something that is wasnt. Last year, they made it sound like the smaller schools actually had a chance to land some higher level players. Yeah, as a school like Mississippi State, you could get your name on a 5* players list, BUT NEVER ACTUALLY LAND HIM. Not even if he is a LOCAL standout. Mississippi State and Ole Miss recruit better than Boise State. Someone needs to tell EA this fact. Only the top 6-8 programs are going to land all the top 100-150 players, so the whole having a chance is a pointless gimmick that just wastes recruiting time. South Carolina signed the #1 player this year in real life, NOT happening in the NCAA Football game. Arizona should occasionally be able to land some 4 and 5 star players from in state. Occasionally.

Having this being so busted, causes team rosters like Arizonas to deteriorate over the years in dynasty. AZ started out with Two 90+ overall players on their defualt 2010 rosters last year in game. That team, whether controlled by human or user, has an inability to sign any 4 or 5 star players. Mix that in with the garbage progression system, and its impossible for AZ to ever field another 90+ player. Its true. Ive tested it.

The progression system is a random 3-7 point increase for every player on a team. Which is crap. Players should progress based on their season performance. Meanwhile, redshirted players should get a small increase. And players who lose their jobs or play like crap should decrease. Yeah, college players should decrease too. Awareness rating is a big rating that EA needs to comprehend and utilize. Underclassmen should come in with a solid set of speed, agility, accel, throw, catch, break tackle, and tackle ratings. Those attributes are something that a player has by the time he gets to school. Over time those ratings should increase a little as the player gains experience, coaching, or size for breaking tackle. But awareness should be low to start and come up over the years. Its the best way to bring about some real life progression.

EA needs to get on the ball on making a dynamic progression system that goes player by player instead of team by team. A players potential and last seasons performance is all that should matter when a player progresses or goes down in overall.

EA has it right by keeping the overalls of every player and team on the low side, as opposed to the high side. This keeps the dynasty mode from being littered with 99s and 90+ overall players, and every team from being a monster.

But with stale and random progression, all teams get equally better and worse over team. For example. Alabam will be a 95 overall in year 1. Ole Miss will be an 85. After year three, due to bad progression, recruiting logic, and inability of Miss to ever land a great prospect, Alabama will be a 91 in year 3, and ole Miss will be a 80. The gap between decent teams and power teams will grow uncontrollably due to the mid level schools only being able to sign 3 star prospects, while the Alabamas and Floridas sign an unrealistic amount of 5 stars.

Coaches ratings need to matter a lot on how a team performs and recruits. PERIOD.

The whole coaching carousel idea seems pointless if you play all your dynasty games. You cant hire and fire coordinators and none of them have ratings. Seems like a waste to me, hopefully it improves over the years.

Hopefully they fixed the program's recruiting pitches. Fixed to where they dont just bounce around at random and kill your program. You win two national titles in a row, and your coach prestige and program stability still goes down??? What???

Hopefully all this is addressed atleast somewhat with the dynasty blogs, but I wont get my hopes up. I never do with EA anymore. Because its certain that the game will ship with numerous broken plays, glitches, and bugs. And we will all have to play the yearly waiting game, waiting on a patch or tuner like we do every year. Get mad at me if you want, but you know its true. EA doesnt test their games fully, they dont need to when they are allowed to "fix it later" with a patch or tuner.

Is the bug going to be fixed that causes you to take a home loss, when you lose a neutral site game as the home team. Or will it be in the game for the 5th year in a row? Just curious.

Id love to have the rosters done by release date, but its not looking good as of right now.

[Deuce]

Someone else may know more than I do about that. Well I hope so, since I don't know anything in regards to TeamBuilder Roster Share :D

Ha ha..I'm sure we'll know soon enough. Hoping it's exactly what it sounds like...being able to edit coaches/players on TB then share. Having accurate rosters on release would be a big deal. ...to me. :)

[DariusLock]

As Ive posted in many other places, not being able to fully edit players in dynasty mode is a deal breaker for me at the current moment. Im making valid, intelligent posts about this. So theres no need to take shots at me for the way I feel about this game. Ive bolded and colored the strong points. Get mad at me if you want, but you know im right.

Unless they make some much need changes to recruiting and progression or allow us to edit players full to correct all the errors in realism made by bad progression and recruiting logic, I wont be getting the game. Why do they keep claiming how they want to make the game as real as possible, but their entire recruiting system and progression system is a JOKE.

Me and buckeye02 have done rosters for the last 3 years and this year we are getting the game a week early. Meaning that we could have fully named rosters and coaches done before release date.

But Im going to pass on the game and just wait for a much better game, called Madden 12. I just can deal with all the unrealistic crap that comes along with the problems in Dynasty mode, LIKE:
-The top 100 being littered with too many JUCOs,
-Top schools cant sign enough players or any back up players so they end up signing really bad overall players to fill their roster or take walk ons. Teams like Florida or Ohio State end up with players on their rosters in the 50s overall. Which harms on down the road.
-Teams signing too many Quarterbacks, all within the same range overall. Im tired of seeing teams with 12 QBs.
-In last years game, me and buckeye tested this. The AI controlled Ohio State, during dynasty was signing an average of 6 JUCO players each year, with some of them being terrible low star prospects. Like a JUCO WR as a 58 overall. Ohio State has no business signing a player that lowly rated. And teams like Ohio State sign 1 to 2 JUCOs a year in real life. NOT SIX!
-Boise State signs a ton of 5 star prospects allowing them to crush teams in the WAC and now, Mount West. In real life, Boise State signed ONE 4* prospect, no 5 stars.
-Offseason recruiting just has new 5* players show up out of nowhere, never having been recruited before. THATS NOT REALISTIC!!! AT ALL

And the big dagger is progression.
-In season progression was busted and pretty much a joke. No one cares to see a guy who is having a breakout year progress 1 to 2 points a year. Thats pointless. He needs a bigger boost than that.
-Recruiting was manipulated into something that is wasnt. Last year, they made it sound like the smaller schools actually had a chance to land some higher level players. Yeah, as a school like Mississippi State, you could get your name on a 5* players list, BUT NEVER ACTUALLY LAND HIM. Not even if he is a LOCAL standout. Mississippi State and Ole Miss recruit better than Boise State. Someone needs to tell EA this fact. Only the top 6-8 programs are going to land all the top 100-150 players, so the whole having a chance is a pointless gimmick that just wastes recruiting time. South Carolina signed the #1 player this year in real life, NOT happening in the NCAA Football game. Arizona should occasionally be able to land some 4 and 5 star players from in state. Occasionally.

Having this being so busted, causes team rosters like Arizonas to deteriorate over the years in dynasty. AZ started out with Two 90+ overall players on their defualt 2010 rosters last year in game. That team, whether controlled by human or user, has an inability to sign any 4 or 5 star players. Mix that in with the garbage progression system, and its impossible for AZ to ever field another 90+ player. Its true. Ive tested it.

The progression system is a random 3-7 point increase for every player on a team. Which is crap. Players should progress based on their season performance. Meanwhile, redshirted players should get a small increase. And players who lose their jobs or play like crap should decrease. Yeah, college players should decrease too. Awareness rating is a big rating that EA needs to comprehend and utilize. Underclassmen should come in with a solid set of speed, agility, accel, throw, catch, break tackle, and tackle ratings. Those attributes are something that a player has by the time he gets to school. Over time those ratings should increase a little as the player gains experience, coaching, or size for breaking tackle. But awareness should be low to start and come up over the years. Its the best way to bring about some real life progression.

EA needs to get on the ball on making a dynamic progression system that goes player by player instead of team by team. A players potential and last seasons performance is all that should matter when a player progresses or goes down in overall.

EA has it right by keeping the overalls of every player and team on the low side, as opposed to the high side. This keeps the dynasty mode from being littered with 99s and 90+ overall players, and every team from being a monster.

But with stale and random progression, all teams get equally better and worse over team. For example. Alabam will be a 95 overall in year 1. Ole Miss will be an 85. After year three, due to bad progression, recruiting logic, and inability of Miss to ever land a great prospect, Alabama will be a 91 in year 3, and ole Miss will be a 80. The gap between decent teams and power teams will grow uncontrollably due to the mid level schools only being able to sign 3 star prospects, while the Alabamas and Floridas sign an unrealistic amount of 5 stars.

Coaches ratings need to matter a lot on how a team performs and recruits. PERIOD.

The whole coaching carousel idea seems pointless if you play all your dynasty games. You cant hire and fire coordinators and none of them have ratings. Seems like a waste to me, hopefully it improves over the years.

Hopefully they fixed the program's recruiting pitches. Fixed to where they dont just bounce around at random and kill your program. You win two national titles in a row, and your coach prestige and program stability still goes down??? What???

Hopefully all this is addressed atleast somewhat with the dynasty blogs, but I wont get my hopes up. I never do with EA anymore. Because its certain that the game will ship with numerous broken plays, glitches, and bugs. And we will all have to play the yearly waiting game, waiting on a patch or tuner like we do every year. Get mad at me if you want, but you know its true. EA doesnt test their games fully, they dont need to when they are allowed to "fix it later" with a patch or tuner.

Is the bug going to be fixed that causes you to take a home loss, when you lose a neutral site game as the home team. Or will it be in the game for the 5th year in a row? Just curious.

Id love to have the rosters done by release date, but its not looking good as of right now.

Quoted for truth.

[GatorBait06NC]

Regardless of his unproven history, I think he's still a "Big Name" in the coaching world, even if it is due to controversy. He's got family history and experience in the NFL. Let me also add that I don't support or like Kiffin haha. USC is paying the guy $4M to coach for god's sake, even if he might run them into the ground.

Again, my original point was that I hope Big Schools don't offer just because it's a user. I just want it to make sense.

Hes a big name because of his antics. Not because hes even a mediocre coach at best. He talks big game and cant back it up. He accused Urban Meyer of cheating on the recruiting front, and Meyer wasnt breaking any rules. Oh, and then all the while, it was he who was cheating.

IMO, he belongs at USC.

You have to be the lowest of the low when even Al Davis knows the low down on you, while everyone else doesnt. LOL

[GatorBait06NC]

2 Things that I left out from my in depth post concerning recruiting and progression:

1) Having a recruit come in with higher positional ratings such as speed, agil, accel, catch, throw, tackle, break tackle, etc, will also make it easier for some users to play with certain lower rated players rather than the superstar QB or RB for example. To break it down, for example. A freshman Running Back should not come into the game with a 75 speed, ESPECIALLY if his size resembles a speed guy. So he should come in a have a 75 speed rating as a FR, and by the time he is a Senior, it be bumped up to a 89-92. The freshman should come into the game with close to max speed already. You dont learn speed. You either have it or you dont. Awareness is the key. Thats a rating that affects overalls greatly. You may play better with the 75 overall QB over the 90 overall QB, due to both players having their positional attributes being close to max. Just a huge gap in the AWR between the Freshman and the Veteran. Thats realistic.

Freshman players dont learn how to run or catch in college. They know that before they get there. THATS WHY THEY ARE BEING RECRUITED. NCAA is not the NFL. You dont recruit project players and teach them how to run faster. That cant happen.

2) On the teams getting worse and better over time equally. I just wanted to point out that the gap between upper tier and mid tier teams gets large and very noticible. For example.
-After 3 or 4 years into dynasty, all the power schools will still be around a 90-95 overall as a team, due to monster recruiting and the lack of big time prospect signings from mid tier schools. So these teams will be covered with 80s and 90s all across their depth charts.
-Meanwhile the next level of team, the mid level teams all stay around 80-85. Their depth charts are littered with high 70s and a few 80s.

Its not right. Theres never a chance of a team like Ole Miss or Missouri to come up and be great for a year. The Floridas, Ohio States, Texas, Oklahoma, etc will always be the power teams. There is absolutely no turnover. The gap between upper and mid level teams becomes large and the chance of a school sneaking up and having a great year is gone.

[steelerfan]

I don't even know where to begin.

You have a lot of valid points, but they get lost in the tempermental rant. There are a lot of things that could make recruiting "more realistic", but giving Freshmen high speed ratings, while true-to-life, would not work in video game land. If you give me a Freshman with 90 SPD at HB, he's gonna dominate. That's just a fact of gaming.

As for rosters, TGT had the first named rosters in the world last year. If you don't buy the game, I'm sure someone will step up to the plate and get them done. :)

http://kotaku.com/5587346/the-first-named-roster-is-out-for-ncaa-football-11

[Treadstone6700]

Full player edits in dynasty is a big deal for me too. It seems like a simple enough add. I've asked around various boards why that hasn't gotten into the game at this point b/c I really don't understand why it wouldn't be. No one really seems to know, would be nice to hear what EA has to say about it.

[Rudy]

I can understand some of your concerns Gaitorbait but I don't think we need player regression in college football. Barring an injury I don't see why a college football player should regress in overall ability. Every year they should get bigger and stronger. We're not talking about NFL players that age and get worse, that doesn't happen in college. The players that disappoint us are simply the players that aren't as good as we hoped they would be and probably don't progress as fast as we'd like.

My biggest complaint about the recruits is that their weight wasn't associated with their ratings. Power backs could be 180 pounds. Run stuffing NTs could be 265 pounds. Weight was 100% random for a recruit within the min and max range of their position. Add that in with the fact that only player ratings affected performance and not weight and some things just weren't quite right.

[rhombic21]

I really like the consistency rating that Madden is using this year. That could be a huge upgrade to NCAA if they implemented it somewhere down the line. Ideally, consistency would increase as players get older, but there would also be within-class variation (so some freshmen come in and are mature and play solid, while some seniors never get it together and can't be depended on).

I would think that something like that could be a really useful feature that would help dynasty feel more dynamic. Also, it would make even more sense in college than it does in the NFL, where we continually have crazy upsets every year that nobody could see coming.

[steelerfan]

Full player edits in dynasty is a big deal for me too. It seems like a simple enough add. I've asked around various boards why that hasn't gotten into the game at this point b/c I really don't understand why it wouldn't be. No one really seems to know, would be nice to hear what EA has to say about it.

I probably shouldn't spout off specifics, but I was asked about this last week. Just know it's on their radar.

[SHO]

Does Height and Weight actually factor in this year or is it still randomized and ratings based for recruits again?

Have the ratings for recruits been tweaked and tuned so they are more aligned with the default roster ratings scale or vice versa? Last year I felt agility was too low in general for players at some positions and it was near impossible to find a strong safety recruit that was faster than an outside linebacker.

[Pig Bomb]

Freshman players dont learn how to run or catch in college. They know that before they get there. THATS WHY THEY ARE BEING RECRUITED. NCAA is not the NFL. You dont recruit project players and teach them how to run faster. That cant happen.
.

Recruit project players and making kids faster-----Sure they do! players work on strength, speed, and agility all the time.... players grow, build muscle, improve technique, and become faster frequently.
[I've made players faster simply by teaching them the proper way to run and also increasing their reaction time thru training].

I'd also argue that there are tons of WR's that do actually "learn how to catch" when they get to college. College coaches are frequently fixing poorly coached technique from high school and refining it.
Players can become better at catching the ball for sure...I think that growth can continue on into the NFL for some players as rates of growth vary from player to player.

Some kids come in with great technique but need to grow physically... others come in as great athletes, but lack the technique to take it to the next level.... both types are project players you hope, as a coach, will work out in the end thru good coaching and practice.

[Deuce]

Recruit project players and making kids faster-----Sure they do! players work on strength, speed, and agility all the time.... players grow, build muscle, improve technique, and become faster frequently.
[I've made players faster simply by teaching them the proper way to run and also increasing their reaction time thru training].

I'd also argue that there are tons of WR's that do actually "learn how to catch" when they get to college. College coaches are frequently fixing poorly coached technique from high school and refining it.
Players can become better at catching the ball for sure...I think that growth can continue on into the NFL for some players as rates of growth vary from player to player.

Some kids come in with great technique but need to grow physically... others come in as great athletes, but lack the technique to take it to the next level.... both types are project players you hope, as a coach, will work out in the end thru good coaching and practice.

Yep...totally agree

[Colossal28]

Recruit project players and making kids faster-----Sure they do! players work on strength, speed, and agility all the time.... players grow, build muscle, improve technique, and become faster frequently.
[I've made players faster simply by teaching them the proper way to run and also increasing their reaction time thru training].

I'd also argue that there are tons of WR's that do actually "learn how to catch" when they get to college. College coaches are frequently fixing poorly coached technique from high school and refining it.
Players can become better at catching the ball for sure...I think that growth can continue on into the NFL for some players as rates of growth vary from player to player.

Some kids come in with great technique but need to grow physically... others come in as great athletes, but lack the technique to take it to the next level.... both types are project players you hope, as a coach, will work out in the end thru good coaching and practice.

100% Right, at OU we had so much QB injury we had to convert WR Paul Thompson to QB (granted he played QB in HS) and went on to win the Big 12.

I'm willing to bet before he was converted his throw power and accuracy would have been quite a bit worse video game wise, then the coaches worked with him, in season, to get those "ratings" up as fast as possible.

Also I'm curious, if we had full player attribute edit in the game, would you just improve your own team, or would you take the time to edit the whole NCAA? I've never heard of only one team progressing...

[Colossal28]

I would love to see impact players really making an impact though. Right now only an impact HB is a real concern. Wouldnt it be fun if you actually had to scheme to try and slow down a star WR, LB, TE or even a great D/O-Line?

This would require a new and improved gameplanning/scheming system though, which would also be sweet. Off the top of my head it would have to include somethings like matching up DB's against WR's, chosing double teams on the line/secondary, and jumping "scouted" routes. I think Madden has/is starting to include a lot of this kind of philosophy, maybe we'll get it soon too?

[Daywalker86]

As Ive posted in many other places, not being able to fully edit players in dynasty mode is a deal breaker for me at the current moment. Im making valid, intelligent posts about this. So theres no need to take shots at me for the way I feel about this game. Ive bolded and colored the strong points. Get mad at me if you want, but you know im right.

Unless they make some much need changes to recruiting and progression or allow us to edit players full to correct all the errors in realism made by bad progression and recruiting logic, I wont be getting the game. Why do they keep claiming how they want to make the game as real as possible, but their entire recruiting system and progression system is a JOKE.

Me and buckeye02 have done rosters for the last 3 years and this year we are getting the game a week early. Meaning that we could have fully named rosters and coaches done before release date.

But Im going to pass on the game and just wait for a much better game, called Madden 12. I just can deal with all the unrealistic crap that comes along with the problems in Dynasty mode, LIKE:
-The top 100 being littered with too many JUCOs,
-Top schools cant sign enough players or any back up players so they end up signing really bad overall players to fill their roster or take walk ons. Teams like Florida or Ohio State end up with players on their rosters in the 50s overall. Which harms on down the road.
-Teams signing too many Quarterbacks, all within the same range overall. Im tired of seeing teams with 12 QBs.
-In last years game, me and buckeye tested this. The AI controlled Ohio State, during dynasty was signing an average of 6 JUCO players each year, with some of them being terrible low star prospects. Like a JUCO WR as a 58 overall. Ohio State has no business signing a player that lowly rated. And teams like Ohio State sign 1 to 2 JUCOs a year in real life. NOT SIX!
-Boise State signs a ton of 5 star prospects allowing them to crush teams in the WAC and now, Mount West. In real life, Boise State signed ONE 4* prospect, no 5 stars.
-Offseason recruiting just has new 5* players show up out of nowhere, never having been recruited before. THATS NOT REALISTIC!!! AT ALL

And the big dagger is progression.
-In season progression was busted and pretty much a joke. No one cares to see a guy who is having a breakout year progress 1 to 2 points a year. Thats pointless. He needs a bigger boost than that.
-Recruiting was manipulated into something that is wasnt. Last year, they made it sound like the smaller schools actually had a chance to land some higher level players. Yeah, as a school like Mississippi State, you could get your name on a 5* players list, BUT NEVER ACTUALLY LAND HIM. Not even if he is a LOCAL standout. Mississippi State and Ole Miss recruit better than Boise State. Someone needs to tell EA this fact. Only the top 6-8 programs are going to land all the top 100-150 players, so the whole having a chance is a pointless gimmick that just wastes recruiting time. South Carolina signed the #1 player this year in real life, NOT happening in the NCAA Football game. Arizona should occasionally be able to land some 4 and 5 star players from in state. Occasionally.

Having this being so busted, causes team rosters like Arizonas to deteriorate over the years in dynasty. AZ started out with Two 90+ overall players on their defualt 2010 rosters last year in game. That team, whether controlled by human or user, has an inability to sign any 4 or 5 star players. Mix that in with the garbage progression system, and its impossible for AZ to ever field another 90+ player. Its true. Ive tested it.

The progression system is a random 3-7 point increase for every player on a team. Which is crap. Players should progress based on their season performance. Meanwhile, redshirted players should get a small increase. And players who lose their jobs or play like crap should decrease. Yeah, college players should decrease too. Awareness rating is a big rating that EA needs to comprehend and utilize. Underclassmen should come in with a solid set of speed, agility, accel, throw, catch, break tackle, and tackle ratings. Those attributes are something that a player has by the time he gets to school. Over time those ratings should increase a little as the player gains experience, coaching, or size for breaking tackle. But awareness should be low to start and come up over the years. Its the best way to bring about some real life progression.

EA needs to get on the ball on making a dynamic progression system that goes player by player instead of team by team. A players potential and last seasons performance is all that should matter when a player progresses or goes down in overall.

EA has it right by keeping the overalls of every player and team on the low side, as opposed to the high side. This keeps the dynasty mode from being littered with 99s and 90+ overall players, and every team from being a monster.

But with stale and random progression, all teams get equally better and worse over team. For example. Alabam will be a 95 overall in year 1. Ole Miss will be an 85. After year three, due to bad progression, recruiting logic, and inability of Miss to ever land a great prospect, Alabama will be a 91 in year 3, and ole Miss will be a 80. The gap between decent teams and power teams will grow uncontrollably due to the mid level schools only being able to sign 3 star prospects, while the Alabamas and Floridas sign an unrealistic amount of 5 stars.

Coaches ratings need to matter a lot on how a team performs and recruits. PERIOD.

The whole coaching carousel idea seems pointless if you play all your dynasty games. You cant hire and fire coordinators and none of them have ratings. Seems like a waste to me, hopefully it improves over the years.

Hopefully they fixed the program's recruiting pitches. Fixed to where they dont just bounce around at random and kill your program. You win two national titles in a row, and your coach prestige and program stability still goes down??? What???

Hopefully all this is addressed atleast somewhat with the dynasty blogs, but I wont get my hopes up. I never do with EA anymore. Because its certain that the game will ship with numerous broken plays, glitches, and bugs. And we will all have to play the yearly waiting game, waiting on a patch or tuner like we do every year. Get mad at me if you want, but you know its true. EA doesnt test their games fully, they dont need to when they are allowed to "fix it later" with a patch or tuner.

Is the bug going to be fixed that causes you to take a home loss, when you lose a neutral site game as the home team. Or will it be in the game for the 5th year in a row? Just curious.

Id love to have the rosters done by release date, but its not looking good as of right now.

Had to quote this....I love playing NCAA, but this hits most of my gripes on the head.
I'm not gonna pass on the game or anything...but I feel like they can fix progression and recruiting. We've heard there have been tweaks...I hope things like this well organized post have been tweaked out.

I'm still looking forward to the game big time. But I admit progression was bugged last year, and though I think recruiting was better than 2010...I hope the "tweak" was a major one.

[Colossal28]

if they've already come out and stated the updated as tweaks, it seems to me they were trying to brace the community to not be upset when there are not major changes, which they've also stated. I wouldn't count on anything other than minor logic updates and the influence of coaches now on recruiting

[gschwendt]

Not sure best place to put this but Ben Haumiller will be on the @EANCAAFootball (http://twitter.com/#!/eancaafootball) twitter account this afternoon answering questions. You can go ahead and start asking questions now and he'll begin answering at 3pm ET.

[Koach Vonner]

I don't even know where to begin.

You have a lot of valid points, but they get lost in the tempermental rant. There are a lot of things that could make recruiting "more realistic", but giving Freshmen high speed ratings, while true-to-life, would not work in video game land. If you give me a Freshman with 90 SPD at HB, he's gonna dominate. That's just a fact of gaming.

As for rosters, TGT had the first named rosters in the world last year. If you don't buy the game, I'm sure someone will step up to the plate and get them done. :)

http://kotaku.com/5587346/the-first-named-roster-is-out-for-ncaa-football-11

I didn't know this. I figured Fairdale Kings was always the first one with the rosters?
Who has the most accurate? Luv or Fairdale?
I've actually heard of guys who get so accurate that they change the height/weight and even hometown (obviously not with their first rosters. But with their 2nd or 3rd patch of Rosters)

[JBHuskers]

I didn't know this. I figured Fairdale Kings was always the first one with the rosters?
Who has the most accurate? Luv or Fairdale?
I've actually heard of guys who get so accurate that they change the height/weight and even hometown (obviously not with their first rosters. But with their 2nd or 3rd patch of Rosters)

TGT did PS3 rosters. Fairdale was the first with 360 I do believe.

[morsdraconis]

Luv goes through and gets the names (and added players) in before everything else. He then goes back, changes equipment, height, weight, hometown, reratings, etc.

[Hustleman]

When a OC/DC with A+ prestige becomes a HC does his prestige go down or stay at a A+??


Because in my mind Kirby Smart is a A or A+ DC but we is not a A+ Head Coach.

[souljahbill]

When a OC/DC with A+ prestige becomes a HC does his prestige go down or stay at a A+??


Because in my mind Kirby Smart is a A or A+ DC but we is not a A+ Head Coach.

Going by today's video, it stays the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Colossal28]

That makes some sense to me, there are often coordinators who are highly toted as the next big thing that end up being flops as a HC, but they still came in highly regarded/rated. Even though he came from the NFL, something like a Charlie Weis

[Hustleman]

That makes some sense to me, there are often coordinators who are highly toted as the next big thing that end up being flops as a HC, but they still came in highly regarded/rated. Even though he came from the NFL, something like a Charlie Weis

I agree that some coordinators come in with a lot of hype but to make them a A+ just seems a little high to me. In college football there are maybe 10 A+ coaches but that might be to high.

I also hope by year 10 in my dynasty there are not a ton of A+ coaches

[DariusLock]

I agree that some coordinators come in with a lot of hype but to make them a A+ just seems a little high to me. In college football there are maybe 10 A+ coaches but that might be to high.

Especially when Muschamp is rated a B or something. Muschamp has been highly regarded for awhile but he's a B i think in the game if I'm not mistaken.

[steelerfan]

Just keep in mind that coaches are editable.

[DariusLock]

Just keep in mind that coaches are editable.

I know but it's the principle! Lol. I think a A+ Off. Co. should drop down to a B or B+ when get becomes HC.

[Colossal28]

I wonder if recruits will react if you are on the hotseat, you turn down extension or you're nearing the end of contract? In real life these situations can really hurt recruiting.

[Gotmadskillzson]

I wonder if recruits will react if you are on the hotseat, you turn down extension or you're nearing the end of contract? In real life these situations can really hurt recruiting.

They already stated that if you on the hot seat, have low prestige or haven't been at your school long, it can have negative effects on your recruiting.

[Colossal28]

Right, I knew that low prestige and short career would affect it, but I meant if you were at a school for 4 years and turned down an extension, if recruits would know you were looking for a new job and be reluctant to commmit, things like that.

[morsdraconis]

Just so we're clear here, we can't edit a coach's prestige level after the start of a dynasty? Or can we?

I read somewhere (can't remember where exactly) that you could, but then I see others saying differently so clearing that up would be very good.

[JBHuskers]

Just got confirmation. Coach prestige can be edited before the start of a dynasty, but not during the season.

[Colossal28]

that's good, I don't want the coaches in my OD giving themselves little boosts without earning it haha

[morsdraconis]

that's good, I don't want the coaches in my OD giving themselves little boosts without earning it haha

Well, in an OD, only the commish would be able to do any edits to the OD anyway.

[Colossal28]

Well, in an OD, only the commish would be able to do any edits to the OD anyway.

Well then I won't have the temptation of giving myself a boost, or knocking down a jerk haha

[PDuncanOSU]

I asked this question in the "Please check this at the cummunity event" thread as well, but I thought maybe it should go here instead.

I've seen in the various videos/blogs/forums that in NCAA 12 schools will consider playbook style when hiring coaches and recruit players that fit that style. Per the gaming tailgates playbook spreadsheet; Notre Dame, Oregon, and TCU's playbook style is listed as "Spread" for NCAA 11. These 3 "spread" playbooks are very different. Will there be any new playbook styles or player types in NCAA 12? Maybe something like a "spread balanced" "spread run" and "spread pass" playbook style? Or an "option" type quarterback added to the "balanced" "pocket-passer" and "scrambler" types we had last year.

[gschwendt]

I asked this question in the "Please check this at the cummunity event" thread as well, but I thought maybe it should go here instead.

I've seen in the various videos/blogs/forums that in NCAA 12 schools will consider playbook style when hiring coaches and recruit players that fit that style. Per the gaming tailgates playbook spreadsheet; Notre Dame, Oregon, and TCU's playbook style is listed as "Spread" for NCAA 11. These 3 "spread" playbooks are very different. Will there be any new playbook styles or player types in NCAA 12? Maybe something like a "spread balanced" "spread run" and "spread pass" playbook style? Or an "option" type quarterback added to the "balanced" "pocket-passer" and "scrambler" types we had last year.I'm not aware of any additional playbook styles nor added player tendencies.

[PDuncanOSU]

I'm not aware of any additional playbook styles nor added player tendencies.

Thanks for the response. This is what I assumed. I wonder if we'll see any difference in recruiting for Oregon and Notre Dame, for example, with Oregon using a run based spread and Notre Dame using a passing based spread.

[WolverineJay]

Thanks for the response. This is what I assumed. I wonder if we'll see any difference in recruiting for Oregon and Notre Dame, for example, with Oregon using a run based spread and Notre Dame using a passing based spread.

You have a very good idea there with having the game go more in-depth with play style descriptions and player tendency. For the option QB tendency to be added I would think the game would need to add either an option rating or a pitch rating to distinguish who is truly a good option qb(it is not just about speed).

[PDuncanOSU]

You have a very good idea there with having the game go more in-depth with play style descriptions and player tendency. For the option QB tendency to be added I would think the game would need to add either an option rating or a pitch rating to distinguish who is truly a good option qb(it is not just about speed).

I agree that adding more player tendencies would also need to include additional ratings and something like that might take more to implement. I do think playbook styles could be changed though, to better reflect what offense the team is running. There shouldn't be a playbook style, for example, called "Pistol." The Pistol is a formation, not a style. Alabama uses pistol formations to run pro-style plays. Oklahoma State uses a lot of Pistol formations for Air Raid plays. I haven't actually seen in Nevada games, but I know they use the pistol formation almost exclusively and think they run some option out of it.

[WolverineJay]

I do think playbook styles could be changed though, to better reflect what offense the team is running. There shouldn't be a playbook style, for example, called "Pistol." The Pistol is a formation, not a style. Alabama uses pistol formations to run pro-style plays. Oklahoma State uses a lot of Pistol formations for Air Raid plays. I haven't actually seen in Nevada games, but I know they use the pistol formation almost exclusively and think they run some option out of it.

I really think you have any easy way to differentiate between the multitude of spread teams. Maybe have designations like Spread-Pass Heavy(more pass plays in their playbook and only a few basic runs), Spread-Run Heavy(mostly run plays and pa passes), Spread-Balanced(a nice mix of run and pass plays but not as much of them as either of the heavy styles). Also have all team's recruit to their specific play styles and on top of that they would need to call a game more accurately based on their playbooks.

[umhester04]

If I have a Head Coach with a prestige at B+, an OC with prestige at B and DC with prestige at C, whos pretige is used for player progression? If it is ONLY the head coach then what are the coordinators prestige for?

[morsdraconis]

If I have a Head Coach with a prestige at B+, an OC with prestige at B and DC with prestige at C, whos pretige is used for player progression? If it is ONLY the head coach then what are the coordinators prestige for?

To determine what job offers they get when/if they are offered a job.

[Jayrah]

I really think you have any easy way to differentiate between the multitude of spread teams. Maybe have designations like Spread-Pass Heavy(more pass plays in their playbook and only a few basic runs), Spread-Run Heavy(mostly run plays and pa passes), Spread-Balanced(a nice mix of run and pass plays but not as much of them as either of the heavy styles). Also have all team's recruit to their specific play styles and on top of that they would need to call a game more accurately based on their playbooks.

If the pb is well set then the team would call a more accurate game by default imo

Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk

[Jayrah]

I agree that adding more player tendencies would also need to include additional ratings and something like that might take more to implement. I do think playbook styles could be changed though, to better reflect what offense the team is running. There shouldn't be a playbook style, for example, called "Pistol." The Pistol is a formation, not a style. Alabama uses pistol formations to run pro-style plays. Oklahoma State uses a lot of Pistol formations for Air Raid plays. I haven't actually seen in Nevada games, but I know they use the pistol formation almost exclusively and think they run some option out of it.

Pistol is both a style AND formation, just like the spread. Nevada runs almost exclusively pistol style offense, while a team like Alabama, or any number of teams, runs the pistol formation in their offense.

Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk

[umhester04]

A fellow Dynasty player from the OS forums has posted this question,

"Ok... So we know that "Option" teams will recruit scrambling QBs... That's great... but how many teams are listed as "Option teams" right now? 3-5?

My concern is for teams that are currently listed as "Spread" like Oregon, Auburn, etc that use the read-option as a staple play... are they still going to recruit pocket passers?

This is a HUGE concern for me because there are A LOT more "Spread" teams that use the Read-Option as a staple play than there are "Option" teams who use the wish-bone primarily.

There is nothing worse than playing against a Zone-Read team after 4-5 years in a dynasty. Once all of real QBs have left they are filled with with QBs that have 50-60 speed ratings."


Someone then answers that they thought the spread schools recruited "balanced" players, and the original posters response was that if they did recruit balanced players, were the QBs retuned to have more suitable ratings because he thought that some balanced QBs had ratings that shopuld make him a pocket passer and to have a spread team recruit him to run the zoe-read would screw things up in dynasty. Anyone have any insight on this?

[souljahbill]

A fellow Dynasty player from the OS forums has posted this question,

"Ok... So we know that "Option" teams will recruit scrambling QBs... That's great... but how many teams are listed as "Option teams" right now? 3-5?

My concern is for teams that are currently listed as "Spread" like Oregon, Auburn, etc that use the read-option as a staple play... are they still going to recruit pocket passers?

This is a HUGE concern for me because there are A LOT more "Spread" teams that use the Read-Option as a staple play than there are "Option" teams who use the wish-bone primarily.

There is nothing worse than playing against a Zone-Read team after 4-5 years in a dynasty. Once all of real QBs have left they are filled with with QBs that have 50-60 speed ratings."


Someone then answers that they thought the spread schools recruited "balanced" players, and the original posters response was that if they did recruit balanced players, were the QBs retuned to have more suitable ratings because he thought that some balanced QBs had ratings that shopuld make him a pocket passer and to have a spread team recruit him to run the zoe-read would screw things up in dynasty. Anyone have any insight on this?

Hopefully it'll be dictated by the coaches personality page. You know, the page where you set your run/pass ratio and your subs for both offense and defense. If your run/pass ratio is at least 60-65% run, then the coach should look more into scrambling QBs more then pocket passers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[illwill10]

Is there a Formation Sub menu outside of the playcall menu?
I would love to set formations personnel in the beginning of the season and not have to worry about it.

[souljahbill]

Is there a Formation Sub menu outside of the playcall menu?
I would love to set formations personnel in the beginning of the season and not have to worry about it.

In dynasty mode? I forget the name of the tab it's under but you can set your formation subs outside of a game. It's the tab where your coaching goals are, and the injury report and practice and the depth chart.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[illwill10]

In dynasty mode? I forget the name of the tab it's under but you can set your formation subs outside of a game. It's the tab where your coaching goals are, and the injury report and practice and the depth chart.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks. I found it. I forgot everything that was in NCAA 11.

[baseballplyrmvp]

minor bug that has always annoyed me, but has the speed/40 yard dash time been fixed?

the 40 time has always been strictly tied to the speed rating, where a 99 speed results in a 4.24 forty yard dash time, even if the player's acceleration rating is a D. has it been changed so that the rare combo of A+ speed and A+ acceleration only gets this 4.24 time?

[fsuprime]

lol doubt it

[jaymo76]

I really want to see a play action pass... hopefully it will be fixed from 11.

[JeffHCross]

has it been changed so that the rare combo of A+ speed and A+ acceleration only gets this 4.24 time?The idea of the 40 time for recruits is to give something that directly maps to SPD. I don't see that changing anytime soon. All of the information given on the recruit screen is a directly relationship to one rating (though some of the mappings change by position). Unlikely to see that change unless they completely revamped the information presented for recruits.

[baseballplyrmvp]

The idea of the 40 time for recruits is to give something that directly maps to SPD. I don't see that changing anytime soon. All of the information given on the recruit screen is a directly relationship to one rating (though some of the mappings change by position). Unlikely to see that change unless they completely revamped the information presented for recruits.i understand that....but acceleration also plays a huge part in the 40. currently, it doesnt. i've recruited guys who are shown as running a 4.24 40 yard time, yet have A+ speed and D acceleration. if you lined that player up against a guy who had A+ speed and A+ acceleration in a race, the A+ spd A+ acc guy wins by a landslide.

the way its presented now, is like they're measuring a guy's 40 time, when he's already at top speed. if this were a 100 yard dash, it would be the equivelant to measuring a guy's 60-100 yd time rather than 0-40. it just bugs me that its not presented right, but like i said, its a minor flaw.

[JeffHCross]

i understand that....but acceleration also plays a huge part in the 40. currently, it doesnt.Right ... because it's not designed to. It's designed to map directly to SPD. If the point was accuracy, it would take ACC into consideration too. But I don't believe the point is accuracy, it's simple mapping.

Personally, I don't get the point of any of those numbers, besides a slight immersion factor. The only time I use any of them is to quickly sort on 40-time and get the fastest SPD guys at a certain position. I never look at the Bench/Squat numbers.

[morsdraconis]

Right ... because it's not designed to. It's designed to map directly to SPD. If the point was accuracy, it would take ACC into consideration too. But I don't believe the point is accuracy, it's simple mapping.

Personally, I don't get the point of any of those numbers, besides a slight immersion factor. The only time I use any of them is to quickly sort on 40-time and get the fastest SPD guys at a certain position. I never look at the Bench/Squat numbers.

Bench stats are great to find high strength+block shedding for defensive linemen quickly and for finding high strength+Runblocking abilities for offensive linemen quickly. It's also nice to find a high strength+tall/big WR because they just seem to runblock better on the edges.

[JeffHCross]

I suppose, but it's very rare that I'm looking specifically for a high strength lineman. I'm usually looking for a total package with as high strength as possible. So it's rare that I'm sorting on anything other than Ranking, except for the rare occasion where I'm specifically looking for a fast player.

[morsdraconis]

I suppose, but it's very rare that I'm looking specifically for a high strength lineman. I'm usually looking for a total package with as high strength as possible. So it's rare that I'm sorting on anything other than Ranking, except for the rare occasion where I'm specifically looking for a fast player.

That's very true as well.

The real issue is, the other stats (besides block shedding) really don't mean as much as speed. I mean, yes, in real life, speed is very much a real factor and they don't have the saying speed kills for nothing, but, in the trenches, strength, agility, footwork, and technique are the equalizers of football. So, I guess I'm digressing to the fact that the trenches suck again.

[JeffHCross]

Yes and no. What I meant is that I'm not just looking for high strength. You need high FMV, PMV, BSH, RBK, PBK, whatever, as well. So I look at the best overall recruits, since they have the best all-around package, rather than just sorting on strength.

[steelerfan]

the best all-around package

:easy:

[JBHuskers]

:easy:

too :easy:

[souljahbill]

too :easy:

The O-Line and D-Line must be 2 deep across with black dudes.

:easy:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JBHuskers]

The O-Line and D-Line must be 2 deep across with black dudes.

:easy:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not going to touch that with a 10-foot pole. :D

[souljahbill]

Not going to touch that with a 10-foot pole. :D

*insert another black man/big penis joke here*


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JBHuskers]

*insert another black man/big penis joke here*


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

...there was a reason why I chose that phrase.

[steelerfan]

*insert another black man/big penis here*

Fixed???

[illwill10]

How did the Generic FCS teams look in Dynasty

[JBHuskers]

How did the Generic FCS teams look in Dynasty

I'm not sure if anyone really had a close eye on that. I simmed dozens of seasons over the past few months, and never thought of it.

[morsdraconis]

How did the Generic FCS teams look in Dynasty

Beat 45+ to nothing?

[JeffHCross]

They looked just as bad as ever. I do recall someone saying that Akron had lost to an FCS team in their dynasty sim, but then went on to the conference championship game because they dominated their MAC division. That's the only time I recall the FCS teams getting mentioned anytime during the events.

[illwill10]

Beat 45+ to nothing?


They looked just as bad as ever. I do recall someone saying that Akron had lost to an FCS team in their dynasty sim, but then went on to the conference championship game because they dominated their MAC division. That's the only time I recall the FCS teams getting mentioned anytime during the events.

Well, it looks like I wont be scheduling any FCS teams this year. I was hoping that we could at least edit them or swap TB teams with FCS teams

[jaymo76]

Well, it looks like I wont be scheduling any FCS teams this year. I was hoping that we could at least edit them or swap TB teams with FCS teams

Agreed! It drives me nuts to see another year of generics... :(

[gschwendt]

One aspect of Dynasty that I just remember which hasn't been mentioned whatsoever to my knowledge... recruits now train based on what style of player they are. So for example, if you recruit an Offensive Lineman that is listed as a Run Blocker, during offseason training, his Run Blocking attributes will generally improve more than his Pass Blocking attributes. This definitely makes a fair difference when you're recruiting players and determining which guys you decide to go after.

[psuexv]

One aspect of Dynasty that I just remember which hasn't been mentioned whatsoever to my knowledge... recruits now train based on what style of player they are. So for example, if you recruit an Offensive Lineman that is listed as a Run Blocker, during offseason training, his Run Blocking attributes will generally improve more than his Pass Blocking attributes. This definitely makes a fair difference when you're recruiting players and determining which guys you decide to go after.

Very interesting, this will make position players a lot of fun to sort through. Does this also tie into a recruits top schools? If he's a run blocker and I'm a run heavy team does that hold any more water for me than a team that puts up consistently more passing yards?

[gschwendt]

Very interesting, this will make position players a lot of fun to sort through. Does this also tie into a recruits top schools? If he's a run blocker and I'm a run heavy team does that hold any more water for me than a team that puts up consistently more passing yards?
They've mentioned to us in the past the yes, a recruit does look at how the school performs but that was for NCAA10 or NCAA11 (can't remember which). In my opinion though, it does't make enough of an impression on the recruit... not sure if it changed much if at all for this year.

[psuexv]

They've mentioned to us in the past the yes, a recruit does look at how the school performs but that was for NCAA10 or NCAA11 (can't remember which). In my opinion though, it does't make enough of an impression on the recruit... not sure if it changed much if at all for this year.

I do remember it in past versions, not sure which one. But say I lit it up in passing I would get more WR and QBs interested. I'm hoping with the changes that they made to CPU recruiting more based on style that they made the recruits smarter as well.

[morsdraconis]

Very interesting. Thanks for bringing that up G. Definitely good to see that those player traits actually mean something (since, at least half the time, a RB labeled as a Power RB doesn't have much going for him in the power running categories). Hopefully it's a noticeable difference.

[Solidice]

I do remember it in past versions, not sure which one. But say I lit it up in passing I would get more WR and QBs interested. I'm hoping with the changes that they made to CPU recruiting more based on style that they made the recruits smarter as well.

that definitely wasn't the case fore NCAA 11. As Texas Tech I routinely had the #1 passing team(I had a 4-year starter gain 19,000 passing yards and around 166 pass TDs) and never could get any top WRs to commit(could really only get 3 star WRs), most never wanted anything to do with me at all. most of my best WRs over the years were ATHs that I converted to WRs(which worked out great though). I was able to attract a few big time scrambling QBs though, which sparked my moved to Miss St/Tulsa playbooks with a read option style offense.

we had another user that brought back the option to Nebraska, lead in rushing pretty much every year, and he could never get any top HBs interested.

[WolverineJay]

One aspect of Dynasty that I just remember which hasn't been mentioned whatsoever to my knowledge... recruits now train based on what style of player they are. So for example, if you recruit an Offensive Lineman that is listed as a Run Blocker, during offseason training, his Run Blocking attributes will generally improve more than his Pass Blocking attributes. This definitely makes a fair difference when you're recruiting players and determining which guys you decide to go after.

I have a couple questions regarding this tweak in progression maybe you can answer them or not, lol.

If we recruit a balanced OL prospect will he progress to the same degree as say a run blocker? In other words if a run blocking G gained +4 in his run blocking skills during the off-season (+4 RBK, +4 RBS, and +4 RBF) would we see a balanced G go up only +2 in all his blocking skills?

How much difference is there in the pass blocking skills when comparing a balanced guy to a run blocking prospect? (Minimum difference is what I am looking for, is a guy labeled a specific type rather than balanced if say he has 1 letter grade difference between pass blocking and run blocking skills)

***edit***
I went an fired up NCAA 11 and looked at my offline Dynasty and viewed the OT prospects, and I think I see what criteria the game uses to label OL a specific tendency. If the generic PBK and RBK grades are the same the prospect is always balanced. If there is a slight difference say C+ to C then a prospect is still balanced unless there is a large difference in RBF RBS vs PBF PBS (usually 1 full grade) then the tendency will reflect the higher grade skills. If the generic PBK and RBK grades are almost a full grade better (C+ to C-) then the higher generic grade will be the tendency even if the other blocking skills are the same.

[gschwendt]

I have a couple questions regarding this tweak in progression maybe you can answer them or not, lol.

If we recruit a balanced OL prospect will he progress to the same degree as say a run blocker? In other words if a run blocking G gained +4 in his run blocking skills during the off-season (+4 RBK, +4 RBS, and +4 RBF) would we see a balanced G go up only +2 in all his blocking skills?

How much difference is there in the pass blocking skills when comparing a balanced guy to a run blocking prospect? (Minimum difference is what I am looking for, is a guy labeled a specific type rather than balanced if say he has 1 letter grade difference between pass blocking and run blocking skills)
I really don't have a good answer for you... I didn't track much for player progression in the few sims that I ran through. I just remembered it being something they mentioned while we were down there.

[steelerfan]

that definitely wasn't the case fore NCAA 11. As Texas Tech I routinely had the #1 passing team(I had a 4-year starter gain 19,000 passing yards and around 166 pass TDs) and never could get any top WRs to commit(could really only get 3 star WRs), most never wanted anything to do with me at all. most of my best WRs over the years were ATHs that I converted to WRs(which worked out great though). I was able to attract a few big time scrambling QBs though, which sparked my moved to Miss St/Tulsa playbooks with a read option style offense.

we had another user that brought back the option to Nebraska, lead in rushing pretty much every year, and he could never get any top HBs interested.

Hmm. I noticed the opposite on 11. I signed tons of 4* WRs at SDSU. I played 4 years with them, then began simming. When I started simming, my HBs were garbage but I had a good QB and some good WRs. My 3-year starter at QB had over 17k passing (I upped passing to 80% in Coaching Philosophy) and I was getting mobbed by WRs and QBs. I also changed my playbook to Texas Tech's during that period.

I guess this is leading me to believe that I should always adjust my Coaching Philosophy to reflect the way I actually play the game. Typically, Coaching Philosophy is only used for simming, but my experience tells me it affects recruit interest, too.

[morsdraconis]

The progression stuff is something I plan on testing the instant I get the game. I will be breaking it down in minute detail based on several years of simming with several different players. As soon as I find some concrete information, I will be posting it on here for all to know as, like everyone else, I want to know how this stuff works and what I can expect from various recruits.

Obviously, there's a bunch of different things to take into account (coach prestige, coach integrity, prestige of the school, starter/backup, player's hidden potential rating, and player's starting ratings) so I will attempt to minimize the variables as much as possible while doing the tests.

Does anyone happen to remember if you can set the recruits potential rating when creating recruits? If not, does anyone know if there's been any acknowledgement of whether or not the rating is set randomly or if it's a static rating?

[morsdraconis]

Hmm. I noticed the opposite on 11. I signed tons of 4* WRs at SDSU. I played 4 years with them, then began simming. When I started simming, my HBs were garbage but I had a good QB and some good WRs. My 3-year starter at QB had over 17k passing (I upped passing to 80% in Coaching Philosophy) and I was getting mobbed by WRs and QBs. I also changed my playbook to Texas Tech's during that period.

I guess this is leading me to believe that I should always adjust my Coaching Philosophy to reflect the way I actually play the game. Typically, Coaching Philosophy is only used for simming, but my experience tells me it affects recruit interest, too.

I always thought it to be that way as well and why I always change it to whatever I plan on using.

[Solidice]

Hmm. I noticed the opposite on 11. I signed tons of 4* WRs at SDSU. I played 4 years with them, then began simming. When I started simming, my HBs were garbage but I had a good QB and some good WRs. My 3-year starter at QB had over 17k passing (I upped passing to 80% in Coaching Philosophy) and I was getting mobbed by WRs and QBs. I also changed my playbook to Texas Tech's during that period.

I guess this is leading me to believe that I should always adjust my Coaching Philosophy to reflect the way I actually play the game. Typically, Coaching Philosophy is only used for simming, but my experience tells me it affects recruit interest, too.

I must have been really unlucky with the WRs I guess. I never had any 5* WRs interested. I signed 1 4* WR that ended up good, but bolted his junior year(mostof the WRs were 3 star). I had a scrambling QB win the Heisman 2 years, and 2 separate WRs win the Heisman(1 was a default WR, the other was an ATH turned WR). the only other thing that must have messed with it was that this was in an OD(currently in season 11), but the run heavy users were able to gobble up the top WRs every year, which made me kind of annoyed since they never used them that much. I was completely stacked at MLB though. one season I had 7 MLBs over 80 ovr, on my roster yet there were multiple top MLBs interested. just was confusing to me. you would think that the top MLBs wouldn't want to sit on the bench for 4 years, but I guess they just wanted to add to the stack. :D

[illwill10]

Does NCAA 12 have Different Running Styles like in Madden

[swampfox574]

Are you able to change the simulation quarter length for Dynasty Mode? Unless I play full-length games, it is difficult to win season awards (especially defensive ones) because the CPU's stats based on longer quarters. I was hoping that would be changed this year.

[Coach Kernzy]

Are you able to change the simulation quarter length for Dynasty Mode? Unless I play full-length games, it is difficult to win season awards (especially defensive ones) because the CPU's stats based on longer quarters. I was hoping that would be changed this year.

Great question, hope we can get a solid answer on this.

[gschwendt]

Are you able to change the simulation quarter length for Dynasty Mode? Unless I play full-length games, it is difficult to win season awards (especially defensive ones) because the CPU's stats based on longer quarters. I was hoping that would be changed this year.
No, unfortunately not.

[Coach Kernzy]

Ah well, if you play 7-9 min qtrs depending on how fast you call plays you should still get fairly realistic stats. Maybe not for all positions but most.