What do you want to see in NCAA Football 13?

[GatorBait06NC]

The main issue with Dynasty is recruiting. Its so fake, so unrealistic, and absolutely horrid. ALL my top 10 are recruiting based. Mainly because of CPU logic.

1. PLEASE allow us to edit conference schedules. At the very least allow us to edit the home/away. So the we do not end up playing the same time on the road in every year of dynasty mode. This affects recruting big time. Conference scheduling has been broken for 5+ years now. Allow us to edit CPU teams schedules too.

2. Teams should sign enough players. Top schools like Florida, Ohio State, Oklahoma, etc should sign enough players at each position so that they dont have to take on 50 overall walk ons to fill spots. They should be targeting other players once they lose out on others.

3. STOP HAVING NEW RECRUITS APPEAR IN THE OFFSEASON. Its completely unrealistic to have a new Top 5 high school recruit come out of nowhere once the offseason begins.

4. STOP HAVING BOISE STATE SIGN 5 STAR PLAYERS. They do not do this in real life. Maybe a 4 star at BEST.

5. Tune down the number of JUCOs signed by top programs.

6. Give mid-level schools some kind of chance to sign 4 or 5 star players based on location. Let an Ole Miss sign a 5 star Mississippi prospect from time to time like THEY DO IN REAL LIFE.

7. Stop having all the Top 100 go to 5 or 6 different schools.

8. Make white guys have white guy names and vice versa.

9. The ability to create recruits much easier, to allow for real recruits to be entered by users.

10. Have a Signing Day, Under Armour and Army high school all American game. Where Top prospects can commit. My bottom line is that until recruiting is overhauled and made more realistic, this game is completely busted when it comes to Dynasty mode.

[GatorBait06NC]

TOP 10 ITEMS ID LIKE TO SEE IN NCAA 13

1. Ability to add and customize a playoff system regardless so it isnt left out of the game in case the NCAA adds one.

2. Ability to edit CONFERENCE SCHEDULES. Conference scheduling is broken year after year after year after year. As Florida, I end up playing teams in the wrong month and playing teams mutliple years in a row on the road or at home. It hurts recruting and hurts dynasty as a whole.

3. All the countless bugs and glitches that keep carrying over from year to year need to be resolved once a for all. No more tendency bugs please.

4. Ability to schedule neutral games in future years of dynasty.

5. New player models and more equipment. Player models need to be tuned as well as Revo and Revo speed helmets need to be fixed in the models to make them look realistic. Too many Revo helmets look like crap because they sit too far down on a players head or the facemasks stick out too far. Add alternate team colors, back plates, eye black, more dreads, remove dark visors as they arent allowed by the NCAA, branded wristbands, make bicep, calf, and forearm bands more realistic, longer socks, more helmet styles like Rawlings and Zenith along with more facemask styles, more realistic looking ankle tape, alternate shoe color.2.

[oweb26]

T

3. STOP HAVING NEW RECRUITS APPEAR IN THE OFFSEASON. Its completely unrealistic to have a new Top 5 high school recruit come out of nowhere once the offseason begins.

. Tune down the number of JUCOs signed by top programs.

6. Give mid-level schools some kind of chance to sign 4 or 5 star players based on location. Let an Ole Miss sign a 5 star Mississippi prospect from time to time like THEY DO IN REAL LIFE.

7. Stop having all the Top 100 go to 5 or 6 different schools.

9. The ability to create recruits much easier, to allow for real recruits to be entered by users.

I have seen a number of people complain about the new recruits in the offseason while I am not arguing with the unrealistic nature of it, I also understand it recruiting would be over every season by week 13ish year in and year out; it at least makes offseason recruiting somewhat interesting.
In my dynasty by the end of season everyone is normally just quick calling because the players left are either not that good or role players to fill in some depth positions.

What would be the point of offseason recruting without the players all the top guys are normally gone, which means the entire process would be about fighting for the 2 or 3 star playres, with the occasional 5 star or 4 star who just couldn't decide then whoever gets a visits first wins.

I think without the ability to have player "decommit" then keep adding some offseason recruits, alot of top programs especially when they are rebuilding take on JUCO's, when I am building a program those are the ones I look for they are easier to get and come in "play" ready.

I do agree with your point 6 though.

I would like to see some sort of future scheduling, so we can schedule people maybe a season out, outside of that just make me a playable game for longer than 4 months. The bugs etc killed this one for me and I normally don't care.

[JeffHCross]

If they removed the offseason recruits, they'd have to make it so that some recruits are still being competed for during the offseason. So you'd see guys stretch out their commitment and, if it was truly realistic, a not-insignificant portion of the top recruits wouldn't commit until Week 5 of the offseason.

If they could do that, without it becoming frustrating and annoying, I'd be all for it. But in the meantime I'm okay with new offseason recruits.

[baseballplyrmvp]

why do so many people want the UA game and AAA game? you can already see all of the important position related ratings during recruiting, and if you spend a couple of seconds analyzing them, you can get a pretty good idea at how good the player will be.

since DPP arent in the game, every player will play exactly the same way if they have the same ratings; so there's zero reason, imo, for having a dedicated high school game in the recruiting offseason, just so you can see how the recruits will play in a game. it'd be a waste of everyone's time, imo.

[steelerfan]

why do so many people want the UA game and AAA game? you can already see all of the important position related ratings during recruiting, and if you spend a couple of seconds analyzing them, you can get a pretty good idea at how good the player will be.

since DPP arent in the game, every player will play exactly the same way if they have the same ratings; so there's zero reason, imo, for having a dedicated high school game in the recruiting offseason, just so you can see how the recruits will play in a game. it'd be a waste of everyone's time, imo.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk

[morsdraconis]

If they removed the offseason recruits, they'd have to make it so that some recruits are still being competed for during the offseason. So you'd see guys stretch out their commitment and, if it was truly realistic, a not-insignificant portion of the top recruits wouldn't commit until Week 5 of the offseason.

If they could do that, without it becoming frustrating and annoying, I'd be all for it. But in the meantime I'm okay with new offseason recruits.

In-season recruiting shouldn't be as big of a deal as it is. That's how they fix the recruiting. MOST of the truly big recruiting is done toward the end of the year (October and November). Recruiting should be very minimal at the beginning of the year (this is where scouting of the players comes into play instead of immediately giving them the schpeel and the scholarship offer). Recruiting really just needs to stop being so damn cookiecutter.

[JeffHCross]

why do so many people want the UA game and AAA game?

Agreed. I understood it in basketball, because the players ratings could be combined in a way that was really unusual, and the game was early enough (pre-season) that I could get a feel for a player before I really started to recruit him. The UA or Army games wouldn't allow any of that.

[oweb26]

If they removed the offseason recruits, they'd have to make it so that some recruits are still being competed for during the offseason. So you'd see guys stretch out their commitment and, if it was truly realistic, a not-insignificant portion of the top recruits wouldn't commit until Week 5 of the offseason.

If they could do that, without it becoming frustrating and annoying, I'd be all for it. But in the meantime I'm okay with new offseason recruits.

If recruits took that long to sign, I would hope they added alot of scouting or something, because if someone is not going to sign until week 5 of the offseason, that is going to make recruiting more redundant and irritating than it already can be.

[oweb26]

Double post

[JeffHCross]

If recruits took that long to sign, I would hope they added alot of scouting or something, because if someone is not going to sign until week 5 of the offseason, that is going to make recruiting more redundant and irritating than it already can be.

Well, I don't think, even if they removed offseason recruiting, that they would ever make recruit's commitment schedule "realistic". Then you'd have a bunch of guys committed before the season begins, with a bunch of others waiting until Week 5 of the offseason. That'd be ugly and annoying. And let's be honest ... there's a junior TE recruit out there that already has 30 scholarship offers. If it was in the game, by the time he commits (whenever that will be), he'd have probably 20 schools or more at "-1". On the one hand, I kinda like the idea that from week to week anybody could be chosen, but it would also get very old, very quickly.

So if they were to do something like that, there'd have to be a ton of thought and planning invested in how to remove the annoying aspects of real recruiting. And I'm not actually sure that's possible.

[Jayrah]

In-season recruiting shouldn't be as big of a deal as it is. That's how they fix the recruiting. MOST of the truly big recruiting is done toward the end of the year (October and November). Recruiting should be very minimal at the beginning of the year (this is where scouting of the players comes into play instead of immediately giving them the schpeel and the scholarship offer). Recruiting really just needs to stop being so damn cookiecutter.

If recruits took that long to sign, I would hope they added alot of scouting or someth
ing, because if someone is not going to sign until week 5 of the offseason, that is going to make recruiting more redundant and irritating than it already can be.

That's what really needs to happen. The first 6 weeks of the season needs to be alloted time for scouting only. Instead of just knowing what the skills of players are. We should see what their ranked by Scouts or whatever but not see their ratings. For the first 6 weeks, you get to scout 2-3 states per week. You automatically receive the ratings of ALL interested recruits in your pipelines and get alloted time to scout any others within the state. For non pipeline states you have to be judicious with your time, although we can still see who's interested within the selected state.

Most importantly, this puts an emphasis on certain regions so you have to decide who and specifically where you are going to recruit. After the first 6 or 7 weeks you can still go out and recruit 1 extra state per week, till the offseason, but you'll wanna spend most of your time on guys that you already know the ratings for. Also, I think it important to limit the time to talk with any recruit to 30 minutes per week and let us talk about whatever we want as far as pitch. You'll still want to know their interest pitches so this will make it a mad scramble to find that out. Once the season ends, you can talk to any single recruit for an hour, as is the case now.

Its necessary to update recruiting imo to favor a good recruiter over a bad one, just to include all of the aspects of coaching to make dynasty (especially online) more fun.

[JBHuskers]

8. Make white guys have white guy names and vice versa.

This would be more of an undertaking than the dev team or community would want to be spent on to get this right. With that said though, in one of my current OD's I'm recruiting a white QB named Dre Ginn I actually find it to be one of those enjoyable things that is wrong. It's always good for a laugh.

[Jayrah]

This would be more of an undertaking than the dev team or community would want to be spent on to get this right. With that said though, in one of my current OD's I'm recruiting a white QB named Dre Ginn I actually find it to be one of those enjoyable things that is wrong. It's always good for a laugh.

This may be true. I do think if/when they put more faces in (I'm hoping for Polynesian here) that they tie polynesian names directly to them, which will be most intriguing with recruits. I don't care immediately if Brad and Kirk can pronounce them in game but white names and for the most part black names shouldn't be tied to these guys. In fact im sure the community would give thousands of names from guys they know to anybody on their team that EA could add to the database. Most of the black players in the game have an appropriate name, so I do think there's at least a more suggested name base for the different faces.

Also I think its important that they keep these guys faces/names stictly from the proper regions. Like you won't see a Tuoilolo from Alabama (as a recruit) so that mostly the teams with ties to Hawaii and Samoa will get those players. There are also many players of Polynesian decent who live/grow up on the west coast and occassionally the midwest, so recruits of this nature coming from those places is not a stretch and would be great to see.

I don't have a problem with any team recruiting them, its about where they're from imo. But the key is to add them first just to give us more variety of player, then worry about that other stuff later.

[ryby6969]

There are quite a few Polynesian's in Florida also.

[JeffHCross]

In fact im sure the community would give thousands of names from guys they know to anybody on their team that EA could add to the database.

The problem isn't getting the names. They already have the database. JB's point was that the level of effort to tie those names with a certain race (and to get the system to run that check) would be higher than the community would agree with (and probably the dev team). Think "cannons" or "band locations" here when mentioning "community reaction".

[brycewillie]

I read this article today and it i thought was very true

http://www.operationsports.com/featu...l-signing-day/

National Signing Day could be done just like the coaching carosel style format.The biggest things to affect national signing day are coach hirings. Something you could lose/gain from some coordinators are recruits. Especially with a Head coach changes completely.

To add to the insanity, Just leave a Committed status for players during the season. Remove the hard and soft-labels and differences. At the beginning of National Signing day have a fraction of the "committed" Signinees (like 2/3rds) actually hard commit at the start of each star level. This way you still have some players with undying alligence and alot smaller of a pool of players on National signing day to a managable size.

Like the coaching carousel it could start with the top and work down. 5 star commits pop up first followed by 4 stars etc. Have only the players that have you in their top 3 pop up as options. and have an overrall timer for each calibur of prospects. Where you have to try and distribute your attention evenly enough. The recruits ask for promises from coaches to outbid the each other. When coaches don't meet these promise players may transfer. Depending on how much of a lead a school has can decide how much it does or doesnt need to promise.

When the timer end for all of the players of the current calibur to sign are done. Any players that don't commit by that point (a small number) will appear on a UNEXPECTED PROSPECTS board before the beginning of the next calibur players. the schools that are 4-8 would then bid on the players that fell through those cracks. and lets just say with some 3 star recruits, they dreamed too big on schools and didn't get picked up by any of their top 8. Have the players auto commit to the school that has the highest rating on ther Most/Very High in some order. Every student that falls to this point if they choose a user school first, will have the option to be declined if you for whatever reason are trying to get recruits in the next and lower tier(s)

Make the MOST pitches have value with the school selection for the students, if staying home means the MOST (Gunner Kiel) then why not have the school selection that is similar. Or have it to where the players who really care about playing time choose not to commit because a higher level recruit or transfer has changed the playing time likelyhood.Have the school ratings like Playing Time adjust base on transfers in or out of the college, players declaring early for the draft, or 5 stars committing to those schools.

I dunno it seems like alot but i just see a way to add something to the games using a format similar to an already in place (Coaching Carousel).This will stop that pesky problem where some schools recruit 3 of the top 10 players at RB/QB only to have them just sit on the bench and eventually get cut.

[JeffHCross]

Wow. I'd never thought about it like that, at all. I'm not totally sold on it (namely because of the complete mess timing that on an OD would be)

The way Head Coach 09 (or, now, Madden 12) did its Free Agency, with the clock and the time limit is similar, but not exactly the same. But something along those lines would be pretty awesome. And a way to add in the unpredictability of some recruit signings, yet also not make it feel "cheap" or "easy mode" for some schools.

[baseballplyrmvp]

i saw an idea on another site that was intriguing, to say the least....but that guy wanted the point system, showing how much you're leading or behind by, to disappear, and be replaced by a list of what schools are in the recruit's top 3, 5, 8, and 10 (in no particular order). its an interesting idea, and i do kind of like it, but i also like knowing that i'm leading by a huge amount and dont have to keep pumping an hour's worth of time into a recruit, when i'm already leading by 800 points. lol

[JeffHCross]

We basically had that before ... and I don't think I want to return. Maybe the specific point values isn't necessary, but it is good to know you're leading significantly (or, better yet, gaining on the leader). That's the kind of stuff that is generally easier to determine in real life (experienced recruiters should certainly be able to tell whether they're swaying a kid or he's sticking with his commitment), but is pretty impossible to share in a game without some kind of point system.