NCAA Football 11 Video: "Preliminary" Dynasty Team Ratings

[tswiatkowski]

Quote: Originally Posted by NDFan1029

For everyone complaining about the stars: The star totals for the team have absolutely nothing to do with how good a team is AT THIS POINT or the numbered ratings; it is purely based on that particular school's prestige and past program history OVERALL. Think about it: if it were based on how good a team is right now, Notre Dame and Michigan wouldn't be 6 star programs, but the stars are based off of the entire school's history.

Then why is Boise State a 5* program? Why is UCF a 3*? MSU is a 3* program with 6 national championships in the past 50 years. Recently they haven't been so great, up until the improvements with Dantonio, but how would we be at the same level with UCF, or 2* below Boise State?

[jmik58]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheGamingChef

But it's not an algorithm affected by "# of wins in a season" as you alluded to. It seems very subjective to me. Unfortunately, it can't be edited like player ratings.

I said maybe it's an algorithm....being very sarcastic.

You're basically debating me for throwing out thoughts/ideas as if I was presenting factual evidence. No one knows what criteria is being used, especially me.

[tswiatkowski]

Quote: Originally Posted by gocards055

I think Ea just assigns random ratings because they know the community will just edit them anyway.

Yes sir I completely agree. I usually just mess around with Michigan State's roster after getting an edited version from the community, but this year I think I will do most of the Big Ten and dabble a bit with other teams as well.

[jmik58]

Quote: Originally Posted by gocards055

Why do you keep saying "we"? Are you on Alabamas team?

It's a basic psychological phenomenon where a person who is a fan of something associates him or herself with the team/institution when there is a favorable situation.

For example, most people will talk about their favorite team after a win by saying "We played well today."

Conversely, the same fan will disassociate from the team after a bad performance.

For example, most people will use the term "They" when referring to a negative aspect. "They couldn't get the offense going today."

I realize you were being facetious but I couldn't help myself

[14straight]

No, Alabama should not be a 99 OVR anywhere. They have talent -- there's no doubt about that. They lost way too many starters on defense and have plenty of question marks there -- especially in the secondary. We're loaded on the defensive line and we're looking for guys to step up everywhere else. Again, the talent is there but I'm thinking the rating should be more of a 90 on defense. They will be a better run defense than pass defense this year but will improve as the season moves along.

As for the offense -- 99 is, once again, too high. They were certainly no slouch on offense by any means.

15th in total offense
22nd in scoring (32.1 PPG)

Efficient offense with lots of returning starters gives them at least a 90-92 rating on offense. These ratings are going to need a lot of work -- and not just for 'Bama.

Roll Tide!

[YungPat97]

still nothing about road to glory!?!?!?!? Ima be so pissed if they made all these changes and didnt do ANYTHING to road to glory

[smoove7]

I am a huge BAMA fan but I guessed we would be a 95 on offense and about an 87 on defense.

There is no way we should be a 99 on defense. We lost 8 defensive starters so WTF?

[Thaen]

I know I'm a Sooner fan, but anyone else go WTF when they saw Texas was #3.