The College Years

[RomaGoth]

Not sure if this has been posted anywhere else, but to those of you whom have played/are playing FOFTCY, have you noticed:

1) I have played seasons 2004-2007 as the Miami Hurricanes, won the national championship 3 of 4 years. Yet, my recruiting is only slightly above average at best. I have gotten maybe 3-4 top 20 recruits, otherwise they all go to schools with obviously less success than me. I understand the premise of the recruits needs, such as location, grades, my teams OC/DC, etc. Most of the recruits that act like they want my school end up going somewhere else though. This is not really a complaint, it is more of an observation. My team is still getting enough talent to win (obviously), but I just think it is rather odd that more recruits aren't interested in a school that has won as much as mine has.

2) After simming a few seasons without actually playing any of the game (essentially, this means without recruiting), I have found that some of the most absurd teams go on to win the national championship. One time, UCLA went 12-0 and won the championship. Another time, it was Alabama. I even saw Mississippi do this. Now don't get me wrong, Alabama is not a bad team, and neither is UCLA, but I doubt either of these schools will go undefeated anytime soon with the likes of LSU, Florida, and USC in the picture. Has anyone else noticed any of this absurdity?

3) This is also a minor thing, but the coach of the year award is essentially given to the best CPU coach. Despite winning 3 national championships in 4 years (the other year I lost in the championship game), I have NEVER received coach of the year. What a travesty!!!

These are just some observations. Any thoughts?

[Logan]

I'm wondering how Laskey never got in trouble for banging Kelly Kapowski.

[dawgfan]

TCY certainly has some quirks. I haven't played in a while and I'm not sure what updates have been issued in terms of fixes and updates to prestige levels, but UCLA was notorious for doing better than they should. Partly this was a function of TCY's bias towards academics, partly because of the geographic factors of recruiting and UCLA being in a hotbed of recruits, and partly because UCLA seemed to have way too many recruits starting off with UCLA as their "dream" school.

As far as your recruiting observations in point #1, I'm not sure what to say - I was able to consistently recruit well, at or usually above what my current prestige level would suggest.

The coach of the year logic sucks.

Bottom line is, TCY is overdue for a revamp. Arlie's game is nice and improves things in a lot of areas, but I think Jim needs to re-enter this market and provide an updated alternative.

[Crim]

I have no issue with UCLA or Alabama going undefeated and winning it all in TCY. Ole Miss, though...

Well, mostly I'd echo dawgfan above. TCY is an amazing and sensational game, but it certainly does have its quirks, to be sure.

[path12]

TCY was my least favorite of Jim's games so far. Recruiting and time blocks were such a pain in the ass.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Crim

I have no issue with UCLA or Alabama going undefeated and winning it all in TCY. Ole Miss, though...

Agreed. My only issue with UCLA is that they started off the game in better position than they probably should - they were usually a better program than USC, which is neither historically or currently accurate.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Bottom line is, TCY is overdue for a revamp. Arlie's game is nice and improves things in a lot of areas, but I think Jim needs to re-enter this market and provide an updated alternative.

If you could take the TCY game engine and put it in BBCF, you would have a nearly perfect college football simulation.

[korme]

Just a few minor rebuttals:

If I was a top college recruit and Michigan or Miami had just won the championship, sorry, I still don't want to play for you. There are evil empires and your team is one of them. This is why no one roots for Duke and stuff like that. Just because you are successful, it doesn't mean everyone loves you.

Also, to say Alabama winning the national championship being absurd is crazytalk. And you are just taking into account real life's currently successful schools. Ten years ago, LSU was not as dominant as they were now. Things change, teams go on mini-power trips. Six, seven years ago everyone was going to Miami, then about four years ago SC had their dominance. Now OSU is going to back to back bowls. Why couldn't real-life Alabama become a powerhouse in 3-4 years? It's SEC football, anybody could rise to the top.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

If you could take the TCY game engine and put it in BBCF, you would have a nearly perfect college football simulation.

+ 1 bazillion

[Swaggs]

All of these things have played in BCS bowls since its inception:

LSU
3-0
1.000

Texas
2-0
1.000

Wisconsin
2-0
1.000

Auburn
1-0
1.000

Boise State
1-0
1.000

Louisville
1-0
1.000

Oregon
1-0
1.000

Oregon St.
1-0
1.000

Penn State
1-0
1.000

Utah
1-0
1.000

Washington
1-0
1.000

West Virginia
1-0
1.000

USC
4-1
.800

Ohio State
4-1
.800


Miami (Fla.)
3-1
.750

Florida
3-1
.750

Georgia
1-1
.500

Tennessee
1-1
.500

Nebraska
1-1
.500

Oklahoma
2-3
.400

Michigan
1-3
.250

Florida State
1-5
.170

Alabama
0-1
.000

Colorado
0-1
.000

Illinois
0-1
.000

Iowa
0-1
.000

Kansas St.
0-1
.000

Maryland
0-1
.000

Pittsburgh
0-1
.000

Notre Dame
0-3
.000

Purdue
0-1
.000

Stanford
0-1
.000

Syracuse
0-1
.000

Texas A&M
0-1
.000

UCLA
0-1
.000

Washington St.
0-1
.000

Virginia Tech
0-2
.000

All of them were presumably one to three wins away from playing for the title, so it isn't too big of a stretch to consider any of the teams you listed to win a title.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by RomaGoth

2) After simming a few seasons without actually playing any of the game (essentially, this means without recruiting), I have found that some of the most absurd teams go on to win the national championship. One time, UCLA went 12-0 and won the championship. Another time, it was Alabama. I even saw Mississippi do this. Now don't get me wrong, Alabama is not a bad team, and neither is UCLA, but I doubt either of these schools will go undefeated anytime soon with the likes of LSU, Florida, and USC in the picture. Has anyone else noticed any of this absurdity?

TCY is a college football sim, not a NCAA sim.

There's a very big difference.

[RedKingGold]

I heard there's a cheat code which assures that head coaches at Arkansas and Alabama will remain in place for at least thirty years.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by Logan

I'm wondering how Laskey never got in trouble for banging Kelly Kapowski.

This may sound dumb, but is this a reference to Saved by the bell: the college years? I completely forgot about that show until you posted the above. Of course, that could be because the show was terrible. I mean, c'mon....who the hell is named screech? Even as a nickname it is horrible.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

TCY certainly has some quirks. I haven't played in a while and I'm not sure what updates have been issued in terms of fixes and updates to prestige levels, but UCLA was notorious for doing better than they should. Partly this was a function of TCY's bias towards academics, partly because of the geographic factors of recruiting and UCLA being in a hotbed of recruits, and partly because UCLA seemed to have way too many recruits starting off with UCLA as their "dream" school.

As far as your recruiting observations in point #1, I'm not sure what to say - I was able to consistently recruit well, at or usually above what my current prestige level would suggest.

The coach of the year logic sucks.

Bottom line is, TCY is overdue for a revamp. Arlie's game is nice and improves things in a lot of areas, but I think Jim needs to re-enter this market and provide an updated alternative.

I only really have played it in order to have draft classes to import for my FOF07. My draft classes have been pretty good to be honest with you. I was just referring to how some of the recruits act like they want to attend my school but then end up committing to some de-bunk school like Southern Mississippi or something. The game itself is decent enough, but rather boring and repetitive after awhile, especially since you can't actually do anything with the games your team plays (unlike BBCF).

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Agreed. My only issue with UCLA is that they started off the game in better position than they probably should - they were usually a better program than USC, which is neither historically or currently accurate.

True. UCLA has proven over a long period of time that they are a consistent 7-9 win/year team. Nothing more, nothing less. Even during a few down periods for USC in the past, UCLA has never proven to have the same commitment to football as it does to basketball. But Ole Miss????

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by Shorty3281

Just a few minor rebuttals:

If I was a top college recruit and Michigan or Miami had just won the championship, sorry, I still don't want to play for you. There are evil empires and your team is one of them. This is why no one roots for Duke and stuff like that. Just because you are successful, it doesn't mean everyone loves you.

Also, to say Alabama winning the national championship being absurd is crazytalk. And you are just taking into account real life's currently successful schools. Ten years ago, LSU was not as dominant as they were now. Things change, teams go on mini-power trips. Six, seven years ago everyone was going to Miami, then about four years ago SC had their dominance. Now OSU is going to back to back bowls. Why couldn't real-life Alabama become a powerhouse in 3-4 years? It's SEC football, anybody could rise to the top.

Understood. With that being said, the whole "evil empire" thing is only said by those whom are jealous of success. For example, I detest the New England Patriots. I do not, however, label them as an evil empire due to their success. I just hope that the teams I like (Steelers & Lions) can beat them (hasn't happened so far ). The Florida Gators, Boston Red Sox, and Dallas Cowboys are other teams that are, for the most part, run very well. I don't call them an evil empire, I just remark on how well they have been run. Michigan is the all-time winningest D-1 college football program. Miami had awesome success in the past as well. They are both down right now, but both will be back again in the future. Your logic of why a recruit would not go to Michigan or Miami makes no sense. If recruits didn't want to go there, then why are those programs so consistently good every year? It isn't because of getting 1 and 2 star recruits.

True, any SEC school could rise to power. However, the past and present point to only 3-4 teams in the SEC that consistently taste success at a national level (Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, LSU). As long as those teams are as good as they are, we probably won't see teams like Arkansas, Alabama, Auburn, and Ole Miss win much of anything except for maybe 6-8 games per year. This is not a bashing of those programs, it is just a reality check. The same goes for the Big Ten, Pac 10, etc.

With that being said, I can believe Alabama doing it before Ole Miss or UCLA....

[Logan]

Originally Posted by RomaGoth

This may sound dumb, but is this a reference to Saved by the bell: the college years? I completely forgot about that show until you posted the above. Of course, that could be because the show was terrible. I mean, c'mon....who the hell is named screech? Even as a nickname it is horrible.

Ban him.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

All of these things have played in BCS bowls since its inception:



All of them were presumably one to three wins away from playing for the title, so it isn't too big of a stretch to consider any of the teams you listed to win a title.

The above information is somewhat misleading. Most of the BCS games involve teams that really had no chance to play for the national championship (i.e. Boise State in 2006-07, Hawaii in 2007-08, and Ohio State apparently any year). I will not argue the relevance of the BCS system, as I believe it is a joke and a sham. My point is, when is the last time you have seen UCLA and/or Ole Miss in a BCS game?

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by Logan

Ban him.

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by Logan

I'm wondering how Laskey never got in trouble for banging Kelly Kapowski.

Meh. Kelly dropped his class, so Laskey no longer had responsibility for assigning Kelly a final grade. At that point, so long as Kelly didn't take any more classes with Laskey, the relationship was kosher in my book...

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by RomaGoth

The above information is somewhat misleading. Most of the BCS games involve teams that really had no chance to play for the national championship (i.e. Boise State in 2006-07, Hawaii in 2007-08, and Ohio State apparently any year). I will not argue the relevance of the BCS system, as I believe it is a joke and a sham. My point is, when is the last time you have seen UCLA and/or Ole Miss in a BCS game?

or Pitt? or Kansas State? or Purdue? or Washington State? or Syracuse? or Kansas?

UCLA has gone 10-2 three times in the last ten years (including 2005), so it doesn't seem like that big of a stretch for me that they could get into a title game.

Ole Miss won 10 games in 2003, and around the time TCY was released, they were in the midst of a seven season stretch where they won between 7-10 games every year.

College football is really cyclical. A good coach, some "generous boosters," a stud recruit or two, a down year for their conference, a little luck, etc. and pretty much any of the BCS schools (other than maybe the academic ones: Duke, NW, Stanford, Vandy) can jump up and get themselves in position for a year or two.

[Cringer]

Too old, don't play any longer.

It was the first (and only) version of a game. Sure parts could be taken straight from FOF, but several things in there needed to be refined over a couple of versions as happens with games like these. Sadly it hasn't happened and at this point I doubt it will. Maybe another version comes in another year or so, but that will be it. We always have card games though.

[Philliesfan980]

The college years had nothing on the classic saved by the bell episodes.

"I'm so excited... I'm so excited... I'm.. so.... scared!"

[GoDukes]

Originally Posted by Atocep

TCY is a college football sim, not a NCAA sim.

There's a very big difference.

Sounds like something I would read defending Maximum Football.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Klinglerware

Meh. Kelly dropped his class, so Laskey no longer had responsibility for assigning Kelly a final grade. At that point, so long as Kelly didn't take any more classes with Laskey, the relationship was kosher in my book...

Oh come on, she was a whore. You know she put out while they were still student-teacher. The fine people at Cal U would still not be okay with that.

[MikeVic]

I didn't like that girl Slater was with. How come he always ended up being a bitch in the relationships? Jessie had him whipped, that girl in The College Years was an annoying fuck, and then there was that girl that made him follow his Mexican heritage or whatever.

That blond girl wasn't bad, and Kelly was nice too. The episode where Screech is trying to score some drugs from the chem lab for those guys at the rave was funny. He ended up giving them helium. haha.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by GoDukes

Sounds like something I would read defending Maximum Football.

Jim made it clear from the beginning that TCY was not an attempt to perfectly simulate NCAA football, but was his own vision - that's one of the reasons academics plays a much bigger role in TCY than in reality.

And while I have/had my quibbles with TCY, it was a fantastic game at the time it came out and I spent as much time playing that game as any computer game I've ever owned. I don't think there's many (sane) people that would say that about Maximum Hilarity...

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by MikeVic

I didn't like that girl Slater was with. How come he always ended up being a bitch in the relationships? Jessie had him whipped, that girl in The College Years was an annoying fuck, and then there was that girl that made him follow his Mexican heritage or whatever.

That blond girl wasn't bad, and Kelly was nice too. The episode where Screech is trying to score some drugs from the chem lab for those guys at the rave was funny. He ended up giving them helium. haha.

I am amazed and rather amused at how much you all remember of this show. I forgot it even existed, and you guys are hashing over entire plot lines. LOL.

The original Saved By The Bell was pretty funny though. Mr. Belding was an earlier version of Bud Selig.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

or Pitt? or Kansas State? or Purdue? or Washington State? or Syracuse? or Kansas?

UCLA has gone 10-2 three times in the last ten years (including 2005), so it doesn't seem like that big of a stretch for me that they could get into a title game.

Ole Miss won 10 games in 2003, and around the time TCY was released, they were in the midst of a seven season stretch where they won between 7-10 games every year.

College football is really cyclical. A good coach, some "generous boosters," a stud recruit or two, a down year for their conference, a little luck, etc. and pretty much any of the BCS schools (other than maybe the academic ones: Duke, NW, Stanford, Vandy) can jump up and get themselves in position for a year or two.

All valid points. However, I was simply referring to how I had won 3 of 4 national championships and lost in the other championship game. The times I decided to sim a little to see what happened, it was not teams that I would call "championship contenders" that ended up in the final game. True, UCLA had some good seasons, but over a long period of time, they are not even a top 15 college football program. Nowhere did I see Miami, USC, or Florida in the championship games when I simmed some seasons. That is all I am saying. Rather odd.....

[GoDukes]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Jim made it clear from the beginning that TCY was not an attempt to perfectly simulate NCAA football, but was his own vision - that's one of the reasons academics plays a much bigger role in TCY than in reality.

And while I have/had my quibbles with TCY, it was a fantastic game at the time it came out and I spent as much time playing that game as any computer game I've ever owned. I don't think there's many (sane) people that would say that about Maximum Hilarity...

I could not even get through a season because the injury problems were so serious in that game.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by RomaGoth

Nowhere did I see Miami, USC, or Florida in the championship games when I simmed some seasons. That is all I am saying. Rather odd.....

FWIW, I haven't played TCY in about 4 years, but in most of my dynasties Miami and Florida State became bottom feeders after a few seasons. Interestingly, in real life, Miami appears to be headed in the same direction.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by RomaGoth

I am amazed and rather amused at how much you all remember of this show. I forgot it even existed, and you guys are hashing over entire plot lines. LOL.

Please. I grew up on the original so being into the college eps was a natural extension. I'll remember every single plot line of both shows forever.

I stopped watching CNBC when I was getting ready for work so I can watch an episode instead.

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by Logan

Please. I grew up on the original so being into the college eps was a natural extension. I'll remember every single plot line of both shows forever.

I stopped watching CNBC when I was getting ready for work so I can watch an episode instead.

Testify! I was pretty mad when they switched TBS to Peachtree TV over here... I get suckass Diff'rent Strokes in the morning instead of Saved by the Bell.

[Philliesfan980]

The real fans can also attest to how bad the "new class" was also. Tommy D and Weasal.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by MikeVic

Testify! I was pretty mad when they switched TBS to Peachtree TV over here... I get suckass Diff'rent Strokes in the morning instead of Saved by the Bell.

What'ch you talkin' 'bout, MikeVic. LOL. You don't enjoy watching a "before they went to prison" version of Gary Coleman, Todd Bridges, and Dana Plato?

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by GoDukes

I could not even get through a season because the injury problems were so serious in that game.

I can't recall for sure, but I think injury rates were something that was tweaked in subsequent patches.

I'm not sure that injuries were really any worse in TCY than in reality. Knowing how much research Jim does into football, I suspect there was some hard data behind the injury rates and duration algorithms he wrote into the game. Certainly the injury rates in TCY seem very high when compared to a game like NCAA Football, where injuries are much less frequent (and unrealistically low).

One issue may have been the roster size - TCY had a limit of 70 (as I recall it was a soft limit though and your roster could get up to 75 or so) whereas actual college rosters have an 85 man scholarship limit, and most teams have quite a few additional walk-ons. I don't know if Jim adjusted his numbers to account for the smaller roster sizes in his game, though I would surprised if he didn't.

Ultimately, the injury rates in TCY are probably pretty accurate to reality, but I can certainly understand the frustration that comes when you take a bunch of injury hits on the team you're running, especially if a particular position group is hard hit. By the same token, I'm sure Karl Dorrell wasn't real happy this year when he was reduced to playing a 4th string QB that had to be moved back to the position from WR.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by MikeVic

Testify! I was pretty mad when they switched TBS to Peachtree TV over here... I get suckass Diff'rent Strokes in the morning instead of Saved by the Bell.

I'm pretty mad that we only get 2 hours of it.

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by Logan

Oh come on, she was a whore. You know she put out while they were still student-teacher. The fine people at Cal U would still not be okay with that.

That may be true, but I still argue that Cal U would have looked the other way.

Of course, Dean McMann had it in for Laskey--so I guess she could have gotten him railroaded out of there. But that would have been a freakin' politically motivated travesty.

[astrosfan64]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

If you could take the TCY game engine and put it in BBCF, you would have a nearly perfect college football simulation.

I actually like the attribute system alot better in BBCF. I'm big on "real" ratings that define a player. Speed, Strength etc...

TCY might have given better stats, but I prefer the engine in BBCF more. At least that is my take on things.

[Logan]

You know who was hot? The chancelor's daughter who thought Zack was Lasky.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by astrosfan64

I actually like the attribute system alot better in BBCF. I'm big on "real" ratings that define a player. Speed, Strength etc...

TCY might have given better stats, but I prefer the engine in BBCF more. At least that is my take on things.

I think we're in agreement here. I prefer the BBCF player ratings, but I think the TCY simulation engine yields more realistic game outcomes and statistics.

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by Logan

You know who was hot? The chancelor's daughter who thought Zack was Lasky.

I vaguely remember that one!

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

FWIW, I haven't played TCY in about 4 years, but in most of my dynasties Miami and Florida State became bottom feeders after a few seasons. Interestingly, in real life, Miami appears to be headed in the same direction.

I think that is due to the over-emphasis on academics in the game. Coupled with the way prestige ratings are adjusted over time, high-prestige low-academics programs are unlikely to be unsuccessful over the long haul. I don't know too much about BBCF's engine, but I think FBCB got it right: by having both a conference and an individual team prestige rating, it allows for some minor programs to rise, yet still keeping the overall conference balance of power stable.

[st.cronin]

BBCF doesn't have a conference prestige rating, but a team's schedule plays a big impact on their prestige. Going 6-6 in the Pac 10 is not the same as going 6-6 in the Sun Belt; I think that in TCY those count the same.

[Izulde]

This is making me want to start another combined TCY/FOF dynasty.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

BBCF doesn't have a conference prestige rating, but a team's schedule plays a big impact on their prestige. Going 6-6 in the Pac 10 is not the same as going 6-6 in the Sun Belt; I think that in TCY those count the same.

I think you are right. When the worst team in college football (Idaho, Duke, etc.) has a prestige that is still considered "good", you know something is wrong. Granted, the rating is based upon a large scale, so a good rating for Duke is in relation to an excellent rating for Michigan, but still......

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by Izulde

This is making me want to start another combined TCY/FOF dynasty.

That is why I started a career in TCY and FOF.

[astrosfan64]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

I think we're in agreement here. I prefer the BBCF player ratings, but I think the TCY simulation engine yields more realistic game outcomes and statistics.

It has been a while since I played TCY, so I can't really argue that point. I would guess that as the Bowl Bound engine matures it should get better here. With that being said, I would really like to see a TCY 2.

[astrosfan64]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

BBCF doesn't have a conference prestige rating, but a team's schedule plays a big impact on their prestige. Going 6-6 in the Pac 10 is not the same as going 6-6 in the Sun Belt; I think that in TCY those count the same.

BBCF does have a prestige rating, but it is kind of hidden. I think what you are saying is there isn't any dynamic conference rating. I believe the list is static with three tiers of conferences.

Like BCS conference, Middle Tier and Bottom Tier.

Middle Tier is like the WAC. Bottom Tier is like the Sun Belt.

[korme]

Originally Posted by RomaGoth

Understood. With that being said, the whole "evil empire" thing is only said by those whom are jealous of success. For example, I detest the New England Patriots. I do not, however, label them as an evil empire due to their success. I just hope that the teams I like (Steelers & Lions) can beat them (hasn't happened so far ). The Florida Gators, Boston Red Sox, and Dallas Cowboys are other teams that are, for the most part, run very well. I don't call them an evil empire, I just remark on how well they have been run. Michigan is the all-time winningest D-1 college football program. Miami had awesome success in the past as well. They are both down right now, but both will be back again in the future. Your logic of why a recruit would not go to Michigan or Miami makes no sense. If recruits didn't want to go there, then why are those programs so consistently good every year? It isn't because of getting 1 and 2 star recruits.

You completely took what I said the wrong way. Me being 1 person, I would never opt to play for Michigan. I didn't suggest that EVERYBODY dislikes Michigan. I was simply giving a scenario where one particular recruit might not like to play for you, even if you are a winner. Thought I made that kind of clear.