NCAA Football 13 Cover Athlete - RG III

[EAGLESFAN10]

I think Madden and Ncaa need 2 have a offense and defense of player on the cover every year bcause it seems like they always put an offensive player on the cover and they only focus offense ..... so if they put a athlete from both sides of the ball so they can focus on both aspects of the game

NCAA13: RG3 and Mark Barron this is just an example

I know some might not agree so let the critism begin lol

[Watson]

Quote: Originally Posted by paulbrownsrevenge

Waiting for EA to put Pat Tillman on the cover.

why?

[blkrptnt819]

Quote: Originally Posted by EAGLESFAN10

I think Madden and Ncaa need 2 have a offense and defense of player on the cover every year bcause it seems like they always put an offensive player on the cover and they only focus offense ..... so if they put a athlete from both sides of the ball so they can focus on both aspects of the game NCAA13: RG3 and Mark Barron this is just an example I know some might not agree so let the critism begin lol

Not a bad idea. I would say Morris Claiborne but defensive guys don't get enough shine so I tend to agree with the 2 athlete covers.

[theharbinater]

Quote: Originally Posted by therealslimshady

because Andrew Luck had a great team. RG3 had a ****ty team and put them on his back and single handily carried them this year to a great record. Luck had all the pieces in place for his team to be great already. That is why RG3 is "by far better" then Luck.

i'm not a big fan of luck, but this statement is just awful.

luck had no one else on offense (skill wise). had 1 te named to all conf team, projected 2nd rd nfl draft.

baylor had an all big12 rb and wr, and an AA wr, projected first round.

EDIT: and fwiw, i think rg3 is a great pick for the cover. but so would luck have been, along with a handful of others, including trent and claiborne.

EDIT #2: this was just bothering me some, lol.

just some more stats.

baylor had a top 10 nationally wr in y/g, another in top 50, and a 3rd in the top 70.
stanford had 0 in the top 100. includes te's. and it isn't like stanford didn't pass, luck had 270 y/g.

baylor had a top 10 rb in rush y/g, and a 2nd in the top 25. averaged 236 y/g as a team. top 10.
stanford had 0 in top 100. they averaged 210 y/g as a team. #18 nationally.

if luck had any advantage it was his defense was far better. but what does that have to do with luck or rg3's play?

both teams were top 10 in scoring, with about 45 ppg. which is fantastic for both. both made the players around them better, both deserve recognition for their great play last year, and both deserve the large payday they'll soon receive from the nfl.

[Redskins_Hokies]

Sweet the new Redskins QB is on the cover

[Redskins_Hokies]

I posted about RG3 and the Redskins......well there we go!!!

[TheNumber35]

Quote: Originally Posted by theharbinater

i'm not a big fan of luck, but this statement is just awful. luck had no one else on offense (skill wise). had 1 te named to all conf team, projected 2nd rd nfl draft. baylor had an all big12 rb and wr, and an AA wr, projected first round. EDIT: and fwiw, i think rg3 is a great pick for the cover. but so would luck have been, along with a handful of others, including trent and claiborne. EDIT #2: this was just bothering me some, lol. just some more stats. baylor had a top 10 nationally wr in y/g, another in top 50, and a 3rd in the top 70. stanford had 0 in the top 100. includes te's. and it isn't like stanford didn't pass, luck had 270 y/g. baylor had a top 10 rb in rush y/g, and a 2nd in the top 25. averaged 236 y/g as a team. top 10. stanford had 0 in top 100. they averaged 210 y/g as a team. #18 nationally. if luck had any advantage it was his defense was far better. but what does that have to do with luck or rg3's play? both teams were top 10 in scoring, with about 45 ppg. which is fantastic for both. both made the players around them better, both deserve recognition for their great play last year, and both deserve the large payday they'll soon receive from the nfl.

Thank you! I don't know how people can say RG3 is leaps and bounds better than Luck...just makes zero sense. And saying Luck's team was better around him proves a lack of actually watching games. RG3 had arguably the most explosive playmaker at WR last season and a dominant running game to help him. Luck didn't. I watched a lot of his games online, as I was curious about what the hype was about. He proved it was well deserved. His top target was a TE and his WRs just flat out disappeared in games.

Now don't get me wrong, RG3 is the truth and he is phenomenal and I think he is gonna be a superstar in the NFL, but so is Luck. Personally, I like my QBs more Andrew Luck than RG3, but that's not to say I don't think Griffin is a stud...I just like Luck more.

[Jarodd21]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheNumber35

Thank you! I don't know how people can say RG3 is leaps and bounds better than Luck...just makes zero sense. And saying Luck's team was better around him proves a lack of actually watching games. RG3 had arguably the most explosive playmaker at WR last season and a dominant running game to help him. Luck didn't. I watched a lot of his games online, as I was curious about what the hype was about. He proved it was well deserved. His top target was a TE and his WRs just flat out disappeared in games. Now don't get me wrong, RG3 is the truth and he is phenomenal and I think he is gonna be a superstar in the NFL, but so is Luck. Personally, I like my QBs more Andrew Luck than RG3, but that's not to say I don't think Griffin is a stud...I just like Luck more.

I agree RG3 is not leaps and bounds better the Luck. I would say they are both equally good. They will both do great in the NFL. Even though RG3 had an explosive WR Luck did have a hell of a offensive line that made it real comfortable for him in the pocket. 2 of them are going in the first round and possibly his TE who was a beast. So they both had areas on there offense that helped them be successful.