EA SPORTS College Football 25 - Offensive & Defensive Power Rankings

[cdj]

	OFF. OVR	'23 PPG (Rank)	Ret. Starters
1. Georgia	94 OVR	39.5 (5)	7*
2. Oregon	94 OVR	41.4 (4)	8*
3. Alabama	91 OVR	31.5 (31)	7*
4. Texas	91 OVR	35.8 (13)	7*
5. Ohio State	89 OVR	30.2 (35)	7*
6. LSU	89 OVR	43.3 (1)	6
7. Miami	89 OVR	30.1 (38)	10*
8. Colorado	89 OVR	28.2 (57)	8*
9. Missouri	89 OVR	32.3 (25)	9*
10. Clemson	87 OVR	26.8 (59)	9*
11. Utah	87 OVR	22.5 (93)	6*
12. Penn State	87 OVR	34.0 (15)	6*
13. Ole Miss	87 OVR	31.9 (28)	10*
14. Kansas	87 OVR	33.7 (18)	7*
15. Arizona	87 OVR	34.3 (14)	8*
16. NC State	87 OVR	24.7 (74)	8*
17. Notre Dame	85 OVR	37.8 (8)	6*
18. Texas A&M	85 OVR	32.9 (21)	9*
19. Memphis	85 OVR	38.0 (7)	10*
20. SMU	85 OVR	36.4 (10)	8*
21. UCF	85 OVR	29.9 (39)	7*
22. Florida State	83 OVR	32.8 (23)	5*
23. Oklahoma	83 OVR	41.7 (3)	7
24. Virginia Tech	83 OVR	29.5 (45)	11*
25. USC	83 OVR	41.8 (2)	5

* indicates a returning starter at QB (at school or elsewhere via portal.)

	DEF. OVR	'23 PPG All. (Rank)	Ret. Starters
1. Ohio State	96 OVR	11.6 (2)	9
2. Georgia	94 OVR	16.3 (7)	7
3. Oregon	90 OVR	17.2 (10)	9
4. Alabama	90 OVR	19.7 (16)	6
5. Clemson	90 OVR	21.4 (24)	5
6. Notre Dame	90 OVR	17.0 (9)	9
7. Michigan	90 OVR	10.4 (1)	5
8. Texas	88 OVR	18.9 (12)	8
9. Penn State	88 OVR	14.0 (3)	7
10. Utah	88 OVR	20.3 (20)	9
11. Florida State	88 OVR	19.8 (17)	5
12. Oklahoma	88 OVR	23.5 (41)	8
13. Iowa	88 OVR	14.8 (4)	8
14. Virginia Tech	86 OVR	23.9 (46)	10
15. Wisconsin	86 OVR	20.2 (19)	8
16. USC	86 OVR	34.4 (117)	9
17. Auburn	86 OVR	23.4 (40)	8
18. LSU	84 OVR	29.5 (86)	6
19. Texas A&M	84 OVR	23.1 (39)	9
20. Colorado	84 OVR	34.8 (119)	8
21. Oklahoma State	84 OVR	29.8 (91)	9
22. Louisville	84 OVR	22.9 (37)	7
23. North Carolina	84 OVR	29.0 (79)	7
24. Kansas State	84 OVR	22.8 (32)	8
25. Florida	84 OVR	29.5 (85)	6

Note: Returning starter information courtesy Phil Steele's College Football '24 Preview.

[CLW]

Man EA is flat out STUPID with these ratings. Worse part community CANNOT edit the rosters to fix it

[cdj]

Man EA is flat out STUPID with these ratings. Worse part community CANNOT edit the rosters to fix it

- The offensive ratings had some questions, but I think the defensive list might be the more questionable of the two.

- They must be putting weight into player ratings (star ratings) out of HS/portal, especially on that defensive list. We've heard how they want five-stars to outperform two-star players, so is it possible that's affecting player ratings of existing players as well?

- They are expecting MASSIVE leaps defensively by Colorado and USC (under a first year DC!).

- Is it possible for teams to have talent in-game but poor schemes with that Coaching AI system?

- The OVR is likely not taking depth into any account. Lack of depth hurt CU last year and in-game could be a factor with Wear & Tear.

- It looks like having returning starters (esp. QB) could be a boost. In his show today, Andy Staples stated as much from his visit to EA a few weeks back.

- Some of these rankings explain the TPTP list from Tuesday (or maybe vice versa.) They assume teams that have high OVRs will be good at home and vice versa, getting some inflation. They could also be placating predicted popular user teams, IE: Colorado.

- It's going to be real interesting to see how quickly they are willing to adjust player ratings if/when some of these teams vastly underperform.

[Wisey105]

From my understandings with the old games, only the starters are used to determine the Offensive and Defensive ratings. So, teams with more returning starters, will have a boost.

Also, scheme difference may make a few points difference when calculating. For example, many teams don't really use a Fullback, but one still needs to be set. So, it will usually be a backup TE or something similar to get a player into the position. This potentially lower ranked player would make a calculation lower.

Many of the Team ratings are closer than you think, but the overall team ratings are normalized for Play Now ratings to make gap between teams is a little larger.

Also, I don't envy the people making the rosters for this game. It was hard enough trying to finalize rosters by the first week or April back when the players "weren't real." I can't imagine the stress of trying to do it now.

[cdj]

From my understandings with the old games, only the starters are used to determine the Offensive and Defensive ratings. So, teams with more returning starters, will have a boost.

Did OL/DL factor in much to the team OVRs? If these lists (esp. offense) are only looking at the starters at the skill positions, that might explain Colorado being so high. It would basically be implying they have the fifth best skill guys in the country. (That's a bit more believable since their OL & depth are their biggest concerns/unknowns.)

[cdj]

Some takes on the Offensive & Defensive rankings from national media:

[CLW]

Man who knew a “bankrupt” kid trying to not payout a judgment against him that holds the ball too long and 1 first round talent playing both ways is all you need to be a top 15 team in the game