Bowl Bound College Football Demo is out!

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by John Galt

Actually, one more thing. A 5-6 LSU team and a 5-6 Wyoming team made a bowl. That shouldn't happen. At least the LSU team won. Wyoming finished 5-7.

Did either win their conference. The sub belt sent a 5-7 team a few years back since it won the conference and got the automatic bid.

[chinaski]

When calling your own plays in game, it would be nice to see which formations on offense and defense were your preferred ones and the ones that penalize you.

[John Galt]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Did either win their conference. The sub belt sent a 5-7 team a few years back since it won the conference and got the automatic bid.

LSU didn't - they were in the New Orleans Bowl. I don't know about Wyoming.

[John Galt]

A couple more things:

1) The final top 25 doesn't display everyone's last opponent properly. My bowl loss was recorded, but some of the BCS teams are showing their last regular season game listed.

2) There are still conference rematches in the bowl games. It may have only been because 3 teams from the Big Ten made it to the BCS (which is strange in itself given that none of them were in the title game). But I thought it was worth noting.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by John Galt

A few things:

1) The suggest function doesn't always fill out the roster as needed. I had a situation where I had only 1 healthy, non-suspended fullback. The suggest didn't put a HB as the backup FB. So, when I went to start a game, it gave me a FB error. I also have passing down FB problems for the same reason.

Ah, good catch. I think it currently allows FBs for the RB spot in suggest, but not RBs for FBs.

6) If you recruit on the pitch of "style," do the players actually check your "style" to see if they match? If not, that is a big problem, IMO. If they do, then I would think "style" should count a little more when there is a match.

The recruit does look at your current offense/style. As to importance, it all comes down to how important an issue style is to the recruit. For those that rate it extremely important, it can be a bigger part of their decision. For those that have it as a lower priority, it won't be (even on a match). You can see how important style is on their recruit card once you get their feedback.

7) There seems to be a lot more going for it on 4th down in this version. That isn't necessarily a bad thing. But I think it needs to be fine-tuned. I've seen teams going for it when they are up by 2 late in the game, on my 9 yard line, with 4th and 3. I think very few coaches would think about it in that situation. 4th and 1 - maybe. 4th and 3 - not a chance, IMO.

This is always a tough thing to pin down 100% of the time for AI. I will look at the late game logic, though, as that can probably be tweaked.

Actually, one more thing. A 5-6 LSU team and a 5-6 Wyoming team made a bowl. That shouldn't happen. At least the LSU team won. Wyoming finished 5-7.

We had one instance of this on the BETA team where there were no more 6-win teams, so one 5-6 team made a bowl. I've seen this in the NCAA where they give a "waiver" if a sub-500 team wins their conference or is needed to fill a final bowl spot. Do you know if there were other 6-win teams passed over for them? Either way, I will check out the logic again to be safe.

[Huckleberry]

Originally Posted by John Galt

2) There are still conference rematches in the bowl games. It may have only been because 3 teams from the Big Ten made it to the BCS (which is strange in itself given that none of them were in the title game). But I thought it was worth noting.

Either way it's a problem as no conference is allowed more than 2 teams in the BCS IRL. Unless it's difficult to hard code that criterion in the bowl selection logic, it should be in there.

[John Galt]

Originally Posted by Arles

The recruit does look at your current offense/style. As to importance, it all comes down to how important an issue style is to the recruit. For those that rate it extremely important, it can be a bigger part of their decision. For those that have it as a lower priority, it won't be (even on a match). You can see how important style is on their recruit card once you get their feedback.

That's good to hear.

Originally Posted by Arles

We had one instance of this on the BETA team where there were no more 6-win teams, so one 5-6 team made a bowl. I've seen this in the NCAA where they give a "waiver" if a sub-500 team wins their conference or is needed to fill a final bowl spot. Do you know if there were other 6-win teams passed over for them? Either way, I will check out the logic again to be safe.

Sorry, I didn't check and I don't have a save game to check for that anymore.

[John Galt]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

Either way it's a problem as no conference is allowed more than 2 teams in the BCS IRL. Unless it's difficult to hard code that criterion in the bowl selection logic, it should be in there.

Didn't know that. It was a weird situation where the Big 10 had the number 3, 4, and 5 teams in the polls and the 3, 4, 6 teams in the GDS ratings.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

I think I'd agree with Huckleberry here. It's a nice idea and can certainly have significant bearing on recruits decisions, but one great RB who can declare for the draft after next year shouldn't mean that you get nobody at that position interested in your school. It's cool that you did manage to get his interest up, but it's possibly not realistic to begin with.

If done right, this is a nice design idea but I'd be worried it could go too far. USC is stacked at most positions after the last couple of recruiting classes, and the only position really looking likely to be adversely affected is QB, with a Frosh and a RS-Soph who are both previous #1 at their position already on the roster. Even Tebow is looking at SC in his final 5 schools although we have little-no chance of getting him.

Hell, SC recruited 4 top 20 linebackers last year, graduate nobody significant and still have 3 or 4 five star guys who primarily play linebacker who have them in their final 2 or 3 schools.

So... nice idea but I wouldn't want it to be too common. Playing time is big for some recruits, but only in the most extreme cases IMO would it lead to a whole position being "off-limits" for that year.

On the whole, I agree with you, and my general impression is that over the course of conversations with Arlie for months, and the last 2-3 weeks in the beta, he has softened his stance on this quite a bit. Both transferring and recruits coming in seem quite a bit less extreme that what I had pictured, and I know that the impacts of both hvae been scaled down in the very recent past, too. The good news is that this is something that can be tweaked based on purchaser feedback, so if our sophomore running backs all transfer after not getting any playing time behind a stud, it's time to gather the pitchforks and torches and head out to Arizona.

[IMetTrentGreen]

i have a couple things

1. the gameplan set up leads to some awkward situations. mainly, i don't think the last two minutes and ot should go together. you get in situations like, if the game is tied, in fg range, under 2 minutes, i would want to play it safe and run, but if i start in overtime on offense, game tied obviously, i'd want my normal offense. 20 yl to fg range is weird too, but no big complaints. i'd prefer to see something like, inside own 10, 10-midfield, midfield-redzone, redzone

2. on the depth chart screen, at the bottom where you can switch between stats and attirbutes for the position, the mouse drop down thing (you know, when you hover the mouse over Cmp, and it displays completions) always displays the full statistic name, even when i choose attributes. as someone learning the game, this is more important that it will be in a month

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

Either way it's a problem as no conference is allowed more than 2 teams in the BCS IRL. Unless it's difficult to hard code that criterion in the bowl selection logic, it should be in there.

Heh. I didn't know that either, and to be honest, I'd be perfectly fine if that, uh, "logic" were left out of the game. I'm picturing a scenario where there are three undefeateds left, and #1 and #3 are in the same conference. #1 beats #3 with a late-game FG in their conference championship, and #2 wins theirs by a blowout. #3 sure would seem worthy of a BCS bid to me in such a case.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

Heh. I didn't know that either, and to be honest, I'd be perfectly fine if that, uh, "logic" were left out of the game. I'm picturing a scenario where there are three undefeateds left, and #1 and #3 are in the same conference. #1 beats #3 with a late-game FG in their conference championship, and #2 wins theirs by a blowout. #3 sure would seem worthy of a BCS bid to me in such a case.

Show me any conference where 3 teams can be undefeated at end of year in a two division format. To have a championship you would require two divisions of 6, and by this logic it would be impossible for three teams to be undefeated at the end of the year.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Show me any conference where 3 teams can be undefeated at end of year in a two division format. To have a championship you would require two divisions of 6, and by this logic it would be impossible for three teams to be undefeated at the end of the year.

No, two teams. The third team in that scenario is from another conference.

[Ben E Lou]

Ah, I see. MORE than two. Missed that the first time. My bad...

[Arles]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

I think I'd agree with Huckleberry here. It's a nice idea and can certainly have significant bearing on recruits decisions, but one great RB who can declare for the draft after next year shouldn't mean that you get nobody at that position interested in your school. It's cool that you did manage to get his interest up, but it's possibly not realistic to begin with.

Again, the 4 and 5-star kids are picky. They will only give a handful of schools (4-5 max) a "8", "9" or a "10" in interest. So, if you are stocked at that position, chances are they can find 3-4 schools that are a better fit. But, as in Ben's case, you can still be in their top 7-10 if you meet other aspects (playing style, location, winning, ...). So, even if you start out as a 5 or 6, you could still get the player if he sees his "perfect" 3-4 are going after other guys. We've seen numerous cases in testing where an in-state kid started out at 5-6 and ended up being a 10 after 3-4 weeks of recruiting and other commits. It is a little dangerous to go after a 5-star kid who has you ranked 5th or 6th, as if any of their top 4 recruit them hard - you will probably lose out unless you nail the pitch early.

If done right, this is a nice design idea but I'd be worried it could go too far. USC is stacked at most positions after the last couple of recruiting classes, and the only position really looking likely to be adversely affected is QB, with a Frosh and a RS-Soph who are both previous #1 at their position already on the roster. Even Tebow is looking at SC in his final 5 schools although we have little-no chance of getting him.

If a player is a 5, 6 or a 7 interest, you are probably in his top 5-10.

Hell, SC recruited 4 top 20 linebackers last year, graduate nobody significant and still have 3 or 4 five star guys who primarily play linebacker who have them in their final 2 or 3 schools.

Linebackers are different than RBs and QBs. Recruits understand you can have up to 4 on the field at one time and aren't quite as discourage by you having a couple studs already. The main positions where this may come into play are QB, RB, FB, C and maybe TE. The rest won't be too worried by a returning stud or two on your team.

So... nice idea but I wouldn't want it to be too common. Playing time is big for some recruits, but only in the most extreme cases IMO would it lead to a whole position being "off-limits" for that year.

I don't think the positions are "off limits". It's simply that the elite kids are choosing other high prestige schools with more a need as an initial higher choice. If Ben had stated no one ever had higher than a 0 or 1, that would be worrisome. But, I would think that a 5-star kid (esp at RB) would probably prefer to go to a school where he could play next season as opposed to one where he's buried under the depth chart (if the level of play is similar). It doesn't mean the other school can't get him, but simply that the one with need starts with a bit of a lead on landing him.

[Ben E Lou]

That's still a little disturbing. Let's say LSU beats Auburn in an OT nail-biter in the regular season, and both win out the rest of the way. Then, the LSU faces undefeated UGA/Tenn/Fla in the SECCG and another close one ensues. As much as I hate Auburn, they shouldn't have to go to the Outback in such a scenario.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Show me any conference where 3 teams can be undefeated at end of year in a two division format. To have a championship you would require two divisions of 6, and by this logic it would be impossible for three teams to be undefeated at the end of the year.

I think this case was the "Midwest Ten". Because there is one division, not everyone plays each other and there's no conference tourney, you could conceivably have a situation with two undefeated and one 1-loss team all in the top 6 of the GDCS. IE, Ohio State and Wisconsin both go undefeated and don't play. Then, Michigan goes 10-1 (only losing to Ohio State) but doesn't play Wisconsin either. In that case all 3 could be in the top 6.

I don't think anyone has seen this happen in two-division formats.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by dacman

In a 2-division format, you're right it can't happen. But the Big 10 and Pac 10 could have 3 undefeated teams, and the BCS specifically prohibits more than 2 teams from the same conference in the BCS bowls.

PAC 10 cant, not this year(could have two) and next year they go to 9 games conference schedule so you cant even have two.

Big 10 i can see though, and thats the only one i see. hence why it was that conference it happened in game, or if not undefeated highly ranked.

[dacman]

IRL, the Big 10 could have 3 undefeated teams because each team has 2 conference teams it avoids. Not very likely, especially since Ohio St. and Michigan are rivals (play every year), but possible.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

That's still a little disturbing. Let's say LSU beats Auburn in an OT nail-biter in the regular season, and both win out the rest of the way. Then, the LSU faces undefeated UGA/Tenn/Fla in the SECCG and another close one ensues. As much as I hate Auburn, they shouldn't have to go to the Outback in such a scenario.

Then what about oregon(Auburn in your scenario) this year...10-1 with the only loss coming to undefeated USC(LSU)....? No third team as i think UCLA and Oregon didnt meet, but its close

[John Galt]

In my case, all 3 Big Ten teams were 1 loss teams. There were no undefeated teams even before the bowl games. There were only 5 1-loss teams, so the Big 10 team rankings were justified. But if the rule is that 3 teams from a conference can't make it, that should probably be in the game, IMO.

[Ben E Lou]

Y'know, I was just over at the GDS board and someone was talking about the polls, and it just hit me: one of the hallmarks about college football is that so much IS broken IRL. The polling system sucks. The BCS sucks. The fact that there is no playoff system sucks. Any attempt to "fix" the broken real life stuff in a game is going to get met with some "that's-not-the-way-it-is-in-real-life" resistance, and maybe it should. To some degree, I think we all want our pet real-life issue "fixed" for the game, but will resist when other real-life issues are "fixed." I know that's the case with me. I've always found it stupid that a late-season loss is worse than an early-season one in the polls, so I would push for late-season poll adjustments to be less dynamic than real life, but despite my feelings about wanting a playoff system, I never used it in TCY because it was "unrealistic," and I'll probably never use it in BBCF, either. Go figger.

[dacman]

Originally Posted by dacman

IRL, the Big 10 could have 3 undefeated teams because each team has 2 conference teams it avoids. Not very likely, especially since Ohio St. and Michigan are rivals (play every year), but possible.

Well, I have to retract this -- it appears the RL Big 10 schedule makers saw this, and purposely avoided having this possibility. There simply is no "trifecta" of teams that avoid each other to make it possible.

[stevew]

Does the game have some sort of "Mercy" coding in it where good players often miss most of the second half when their team is up say 42-0? I would hope if some team tries to keep running up the score that negative things happen to the coach.

[John Galt]

I now have a repeatable CTD during the transition to the 3rd week of recruiting. The game is on the "Taking CPU Action" box and then just closes. I've reloaded the game a couple times, messed with my recruiting choices, but it always dies when advancing to the next week.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by John Galt

I now have a repeatable CTD during the transition to the 3rd week of recruiting. The game is on the "Taking CPU Action" box and then just closes. I've reloaded the game a couple times, messed with my recruiting choices, but it always dies when advancing to the next week.

Is there a way you could zip up the .sav, stats.dat and setup.dat and email it to me ([email protected])? I can then check it out and hopefully find the issue.

Thanks

[sovereignstar]

Is it just me or on the rankings screen is the strength of schedule measure taking into account your whole schedule, ie the teams you've played AND the teams you are going to play? Is that really what we want to see on that screen during the season? I think I'd rather see the SOS formula build up and include only the teams I've played in the past.

[wbatl1]

Originally Posted by sovereignstar

Is it just me or on the rankings screen is the strength of schedule measure taking into account your whole schedule, ie the teams you've played AND the teams you are going to play? Is that really what we want to see on that screen during the season? I think I'd rather see the SOS formula build up and include only the teams I've played in the past.

I dont know about which I would like, but when commenatators and the BCS talk about strength of schedule, they are talking about the whole season I believe. I know that when watching Carolina in week 3, they were talking about Carolina having a top 10 SOS and were including the later games(VT and Miami) in that figure. The SOS does evolve and change however, and the schools go up or down...

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

It took him 13 seconds to spike the ball?

No, 13 seconds to run the play and then hurry the team to the line and spike the ball.

[IMetTrentGreen]

3. in case anybody doesn't have me on ignore, i hate that when i put 0 on a formation or play, it still gets called. i hate even more than the aggregate stats of all those pass plays are like 1/13 7 ints. that is a little harsh, and its happened every career so far

[DaddyTorgo]

i don't understand the purpose of the offensive/defensive "playbook" screens. are they just there so you can view the plays, or can you actually "do" anything with them?

[GrantDawg]

I am having a problem on the st screen. I can't get it to save my changes on the coverage postions, and the computer wants to place two injured players in the 7 and 8 positions. Annoying.

[Ben E Lou]

Yeah, there appear to be some lingering depth chart issues. I hope Arlie doesn't regret his decision to add locks in the 11th hour. They all seem to have cropped up since that addition.

[GrantDawg]

And the volitility in the polls are about crazy. I went from number 6 to number 2 in the first two weeks, then had a bye week and dropped back to number 6.

[DaddyTorgo]

RTE 3022 in Week 3 after I had finished playing my game and simming the rest of the week. Game crashed.

[Arles]

Do you have the save you can send me at [email protected]?

[Arles]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

RTE 3022 in Week 3 after I had finished playing my game and simming the rest of the week. Game crashed.

That's the error for a duplicate key, did you have one team somehow playing two games in week 3? That would case it.

[Arles]

As another follow up, did you click "Sim Week" again after your game ended?

[DaddyTorgo]

i did click sim week again after my game ended. that would cause that? okay. well at least i know what it was and that it wasn't the game's fault. you *might* think about adding a little disclaimer saying that under the "sim week" and "sim season" buttons just so you don't get a million people screaming about that.

or maybe i'm the only idiot, i dunno.

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by Arles

Again, the 4 and 5-star kids are picky. They will only give a handful of schools (4-5 max) a "8", "9" or a "10" in interest. So, if you are stocked at that position, chances are they can find 3-4 schools that are a better fit. But, as in Ben's case, you can still be in their top 7-10 if you meet other aspects (playing style, location, winning, ...). So, even if you start out as a 5 or 6, you could still get the player if he sees his "perfect" 3-4 are going after other guys. We've seen numerous cases in testing where an in-state kid started out at 5-6 and ended up being a 10 after 3-4 weeks of recruiting and other commits. It is a little dangerous to go after a 5-star kid who has you ranked 5th or 6th, as if any of their top 4 recruit them hard - you will probably lose out unless you nail the pitch early.


If a player is a 5, 6 or a 7 interest, you are probably in his top 5-10.


Linebackers are different than RBs and QBs. Recruits understand you can have up to 4 on the field at one time and aren't quite as discourage by you having a couple studs already. The main positions where this may come into play are QB, RB, FB, C and maybe TE. The rest won't be too worried by a returning stud or two on your team.


I don't think the positions are "off limits". It's simply that the elite kids are choosing other high prestige schools with more a need as an initial higher choice. If Ben had stated no one ever had higher than a 0 or 1, that would be worrisome. But, I would think that a 5-star kid (esp at RB) would probably prefer to go to a school where he could play next season as opposed to one where he's buried under the depth chart (if the level of play is similar). It doesn't mean the other school can't get him, but simply that the one with need starts with a bit of a lead on landing him.

All of this is very good news Arlie. I haven't played since the new demo was released, so i'm sure it is now very possible to work recruits interest up with the recruiting process being more drawn out. Before, if a recruit didn't have at least a nine interest, I didn't feel I had enough time to have a shot at him. And I certainly understand that playing time is huge (main thing?) in a lot of recruits minds IRL. Very reassuring.

Being picky, players switch positions quite a bit on the line, so I'm not sure that C really belongs on that list. I can't imagine a guy thinking "they have a stud center I won't go there" because then if he's that good to be a five star recruit, he'd move to guard.QB and RB definitely though. Other position I can kinda think of might be P/K. Not much point going to a school with an all-american sophomore punter in front of you, because there's only one position on the team and the guy ahead of you probably isn't going to get hurt or drafted early.

[Airhog]

Well, the new demo crashes for me in the same manner as the last demo. I really wanted to buy this when it comes out, but I probably won't unless the final demo runs. Maybe in the future I will decide to format my PC, and that will fix the problems I have.

[dubb93]

Quick question. Obviously my base offense and defense is going to be the "First 3 quarters, score tied, ball between own 20 and field goal range." Is there any way to copy this base offense and defense to all situations and field positions in a given gameplan? That way we can just set the base plan and go through and make adjustments for every situation? Right now it seems like some serious back and forth clicking to get through a gameplan(seems alot worse than setting FOF gameplans for some reason).

[kingfc22]

Originally Posted by John Galt

5) A bowl screen that shows all the bowl matchups would be VERY nice. This should be in addition to the new email letting you know which bowl you are playing in.

This a huge must IMO.

[dubb93]

It is a little dangerous to go after a 5-star kid who has you ranked 5th or 6th, as if any of their top 4 recruit them hard - you will probably lose out unless you nail the pitch early.

I know they list a bunch of schools on thier card that they are interested in, but how can you tell where they rank you? Sometimes when I look at a 5* player every team they are interested in will be blue for interest. How can I tell their top interest team from their 10th if they are all blue?

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by dubb93

I know they list a bunch of schools on thier card that they are interested in, but how can you tell where they rank you? Sometimes when I look at a 5* player every team they are interested in will be blue for interest. How can I tell their top interest team from their 10th if they are all blue?

true

[dubb93]

Linebackers are different than RBs and QBs. Recruits understand you can have up to 4 on the field at one time and aren't quite as discourage by you having a couple studs already. The main positions where this may come into play are QB, RB, FB, C and maybe TE. The rest won't be too worried by a returning stud or two on your team.

I don't know if it was programmed this way or not, but what I'm seeing as Florida State is positions where I have good seniors currently and poor backups such as my free safety position. I have an 82/82 senior and his backup is 51/63. I'm getting serious interest from every highly ranked FS in the country. I'm blue for interest from the top 5(all ranked in the top 100 recruits the the country) and 7 of the top 10.

While a position like RB where I have a junior rated 76/90 and a sophomore rated 72/83 I am not getting serious interest from anyone out of state. While all the in state RB's still have serious interest in me. A 5* guy ranked the 18th overal prospect in the country has me green for interest, while a 4* guy ranked in the top 150 has me blue. And all the 3* guys have me blue for interest. So I don't see a problem with how this is working at all.

I've seen other positions where I don't have depth getting national interest, while other positions where I'm set for a few years I simply recieve in state interest(including the top guys from the state). Sounds like its working exactly as it should to me.

[dubb93]

What does the recruits level of competition have to do with anything, b/c I'm seeing that most recruits will come from (3) level of competition. When I look at Indiana I see schools such as Greensburgh, New Pal, Franklin County, and other small schools putting players on D1 teams, while there is only 1 recruit in the state from the top level. I'm sure Indiana doesn't put alot of guys on D1 teams, but when they do they come from Larence North, Ben Davis, East Chicago, Pike, Perry Meridian, Warren Central, Decatur Central, Delta, Richmond, and all the Muncie Teams. Not 3A cellar dwellers such as Greensburg and New Pal(seriously, my local team usually pounds these guys and we haven't ever put a guy on a D1 team).

EDIT: Franklin County should not be putting guys on D1 teams ever. When I was in high school we beat them by 40+ every year.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by dubb93

What does the recruits level of competition have to do with anything, b/c I'm seeing that most recruits will come from (3) level of competition. When I look at Indiana I see schools such as Greensburgh, New Pal, Franklin County, and other small schools putting players on D1 teams, while there is only 1 recruit in the state from the top level. I'm sure Indiana doesn't put alot of guys on D1 teams, but when they do they come from Larence North, Ben Davis, East Chicago, Pike, Perry Meridian, Warren Central, Decatur Central, Delta, Richmond, and all the Muncie Teams. Not 3A cellar dwellers such as Greensburg and New Pal(seriously, my local team usually pounds these guys and we haven't ever put a guy on a D1 team).

EDIT: Franklin County should not be putting guys on D1 teams ever. When I was in high school we beat them by 40+ every year.

There is no way he would spend enough time to research how talented each highschool is in the country...that would be insanely time consuming. TCY jsut randomized it all at the beginning of each career, and id imagine this is similar or their is no athletic and academic prep rations for high schools

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

There is no way he would spend enough time to research how talented each highschool is in the country...that would be insanely time consuming. TCY jsut randomized it all at the beginning of each career, and id imagine this is similar or their is no athletic and academic prep rations for high schools

No, it is not random. I believe that they used rankings and records for the last five years, which is fairly easy data to get ahold of. The problem, of course, with that is that sometimes those don't correlate to actual recruit talent being produced, particularly at the highest levels. For example, Camden County High in Georgia, which is one of only three "elite" schools in the game from GA, rarely puts out stud players, but they win. From some comments I made, I assume, Arlie changed the prestige of the top HS's in Georgia. (I noticed that they changed some time after I received the beta.) Originally, Brookwood, Parkview and Camden, I think, were the top three. Brookwood and Parkview have stellar records and state titles, but they typically don't turn out the number of D1 prospects that Stephenson and Tucker do, neither of which has a state title on their resume. I would assume that you'll see some similar things in other states.

However, you'll note that most recruits from better states will get listed as "3" or better. Arlie explained this to me by saying that, yeah, a kid may come from a school in Georgia that sucks, BUT he's going to be playing against strong competition in-state. The highest levels of schools in those states, of course, will play even stronger competition, because they'll play each other on the road to the state title, schedule each other for big regular season paydays, etc.

To answer the original question, the idea behind the level of competition on the recruit screen is to help compare stats. If a guy rushed for 1,500 yards and 6.0 against average competition, he might not be as good as a guy who rushed for 1,200 yards and 5.5 yards per carry against elite competition. I like it.

[Ben E Lou]

Oh, and the good news is that you can always edit the high schools from your state and surrounding states to make it more realistic for you. I'll make a lot of changes in Georgia, and probably a few in Alabama, Florida, Tennessee and the Carolinas. If I understand correctly, making changes won't impact the overall level of talent coming from your state, but it will impact the distribution of that talent.