NCAA Football 12 Blog - Coach Carousel

[goravens2052]

Nice. I like what I saw here. Hopefully Coaching Carousel makes it's way to Madden Franchise Mode at some point since the NFL sees that happening every year.

I have to say if they had something where you could import the Created Coaches to Madden like say after you build up 2 or 3 teams, you get an "offer" from a NFL Team and you have the option to import him to Madden as well as re-signing or going to another College Team, than this could really add more fun to NCAA.

[CurryStorm]

Quote: Originally Posted by canes21

Okay, finally on my computer so I can type what I really want to say. Teaching: This rating dictates how well players progress under your watch. If you have an A+ or 95+ rating, the players are going to consistently grow 4-5 points per year at the very least. If you are average in this category, then some player might have big jumps while others stay the same or possibly get worse.

Very nice, in-depth post. I also feel that the CC should have different coach ratings, but I'm just so happy to actually have a CC in a college football game, I'm not going to worry about it until next year or so. Coaches are so important in football, from the head coach to the special teams coordinator and so on, that this has been something that should have been implemented years ago. I wish it were a little more in-depth, but I'm going to have to play it first before I make any kind of judgement or worry too much about what may or may not be in.

The reason I quoted you, though, if for the teaching rating. This rating would have to be carefully thought out. I wouldn't want players to ALWAYS improve 4+ points just because they have a good coach. Some players just don't improve no matter what their talent level is or the coaching they receive. If you put too much emphasis on how a head coach improves players attributes, you're going to lose some of what makes individual players unique.

I think, taking your example, a coach with an A+ teaching should get large jumps from a higher *percentage* of their players than a coach with a lower rating. Maybe an A+ teaching coach will normally get 4 or 5 points of improvement from 65% (or whatever) of their team, while a C+ teaching coach would only get 4 or 5 points of improvement from 30% (or whatever) of their team. I just think there should be some players that, no matter who the coach is, they're just not going to improve and some players that are going to improve 5 points every single year no matter who the coach.

Maybe a more complex situation would be for recruits to have hidden ratings that would break each recruit into one of three types: 1 type of recruit will become great no matter who the coach, 1 type will never get better no matter who the coach and the last type depends ONLY on who their coach is. The third type would be the proverbial "diamonds in the rough" where a great coach can take a 2* player and coach him up to be a 4-5* player by the time he graduates. I think this would separate the good from the great coaches- any above average coach can land a 4 or 5 star every now and then, but a great coach can take that 2* and make him "play" like a 5*. This type of coach would be your Frank Beamer or Gary Patterson type coach.

[poopoop]

One thing people consistently miss is that coach ratings really have 0 to do with a coaching carousel. They just get lumped together for whatever reason. Even in a play-now game there should be a difference between coaches.

I think that was what they were trying to do last year with the 120 ways to win, but a lot of the "ways" didn't function correctly and the coaches ran too close together in terms of philosophy/playbooks. Good example being how every team would run all out blitzes often on D.

coach ratings / better philosophies = having to think about what coach you're playing against. Someone could turn NCAA 11 on swap Urban Meyer with Danny Hope and I'm not sure I'd ever notice. It'd add another layer of strategy to the game. It'd help solving the problem we have now where you can just pick a scheme, never adjust, use it against every team and have success doing so.

[shogun5]

Quote: Originally Posted by Gotmadskillzson

I hope Joe Pa retire my second year of dynasty. And I would chuckle if I see Rich Rod gets fired for under performing. Damn it I wish Charlie Weiss was still at ND, he would be fired for under performing too.

Rich Rod already got fired Brady Hoke is Michigans new head coach.

[shogun5]

Quote: Originally Posted by jeremym480

That's how I see it as well. IMO having total control over the recruiting was way to easy and cheesy. I really enjoyed the challenge that the new recruiting provided. Especially, in online dynasties. I actually had recruiting classes that weren't in the top 20. Hell, I had a class that wasn't in the top 50. NCAA 11 is the first NCAA I could ever say that. So different strokes for different folks but, count me in the group that loves a challenge. With that said, I would like to see the system tweaked. Things like having to "change the topic" multiple times in a conversation can get annoying. I'm also hoping that the logic improved, as well.

I agree my recruiting classes didnt start getting good untill my school prestige and everything got better, would be cheesy if u could bring in a top 25 class at middle te. st. that just doesnt happen and if u think it does look at the last 20 years of recruiting classes in real life and tell me what mid major is in there.

[justblaze09]

Wait, you want coaches to ultimately be able to develop their players 4-5 pts a year. That's 16-20 pts a career, and you end up with rosters we have now (which I think it too overrated).

[shogun5]

Quote: Originally Posted by Hova57

I get that and like it has been said over and over again even for that dev team it took awhile. I mean damn even when they try you guys shoot them down. Once again no one has the game , we are going by impressions, without doing it ourselves so your mind is left to wonder. Let's get the game before we pass judgement its a start NCAA has shown improvement two years in a row, while it took madden almost three years to get where they are in their franchise. Do the math

Absolutely and there is still more dynasty details upcoming that no one knows about, this is just the first thing, we could be seeing one of the greatest college football game ever to land in our hands lets not rip them apart for adding new things before we even try it, yes there might be things that dont work out right but i doubt it will be anything that ruins the game, I mean come on look at the leaps and bounds made between 10 and 11 i doubt there going to start back tracking now, the team working on this game is to good and they care which is the most important part.

[jwilphl]

My thoughts on the this mode are mostly positive. I'm glad it is coming to Dynasty, but to me it seems that this is the only change made to Dynasty (other than custom conferences which are mostly superficial), and that's the problem. It is hardly "the deepest mode" as they advertise it to be.

I would like to see more differentiation between Coordinators and Head Coaches--it seems like the only differences are the goals you contract for and playing both sides of the ball. I think Coordinators should only be involved in recruiting for their side of the ball, as well, but not exclusively (as the HC still has maximum control). I would also like to see more responsibilities given once you become a head coach so there is a bit more incentive to do so.

I also think they can take a path similar to RTG and have your coach start on a high school team (perhaps a tie-in after you complete your career as a player?), then based upon your coaching abilities and the way you manage your players/team, you receive offers from various schools--probably low-end at first--to either coach or coordinate. I do understand some concern about just wanting to pick your team, however. This would really connect all the modes in the game.

Aside from that, as long as the implementation is done well, this should be a fine addition. I'm looking to see that teams behave realistically with their coaches. I can't say I'm a huge fan of the goal system: some of the goals look unrealistic or just unbalanced.

I'm looking forward to hearing the details on the revamped RTG mode. Hopefully something there can really entice us. They have done some good work this year, and hopefully it sets us up for a future of much-improved football.