Renegade, when you say that the default freshmen are underrated, are you comparing them to the generated freshmen class? I assume so, it just wasn't clear from your original post.

Take a look at this, it's a similar idea: http://www.thegamingtailgate.com/for...ssion-Examined. I don't plan to update it this season, because I believe the calculation for OVR has changed drastically this year.

In my opinion, there are several problems (at least in years past, I haven't had the chance to over-analyze NCAA 13) with the default freshmen.
  • The most obvious is that their progression does not, in practically any way, resemble the progression possibilities that the roster reflects year over year (i.e. between NCAA 12 and NCAA 13).
  • Another problem, one that was readily apparent in NCAA 11, was that sometimes the freshmen have their rating reduced in ways that they can't recover from. In NCAA 11, the most common was that a freshman WR (maybe more than just WR) would have his AWR at 40. You simply won't progress highly enough to overcome that, at least in terms of OVR. I've noticed at least a few guys that are similar in NCAA 13; like some OLBs with 90+ SPD and 90+ ACC, but absolutely pathetic (~65) AGI, which kills their OVR.
  • The third issue, and I believe this may be the most relevant to Renegade's post, is that, unlike Madden's rookie ratings (or, I guess, Madden's ratings period), I don't believe NCAA's freshmen are necessarily individually rated. That is to say, I'm not sure Mario Edwards, Florida State's DE, rated 80 OVR on the default roster, would necessarily have been rated 80 OVR on another team, say Ohio State, or say Mid Tenn State. Now, that's just my opinion, and I could be totally wrong.