NCAA Football 12 Team Ratings and Prestige Revealed (Tradition Sports Online)

[schumj]

Quote: Originally Posted by bigbob

I'm still trying to figure out how my Nittany Lions are an A on offense. We lose out leading rusher for the last 4 years, our quarterbacks weren't great. Paul Jones was the best quarterback on our roster and he redshirted, but he obviously won't effect the ratings too much. B+ at best on offense for us.

Although I think the QB's are a ? I think the running game is an upgrade, the WR's are great and a good OL. I do think B+ would be more appropriate but they are not going to be bad this year, and for all the talk Wisconsin is getting as a time to shine with the OSU situation, I think people need to pay attention to PSU. They are going to have one of the best Defenses in the nation and as long as the QB progresses (whichever one) they should be good.

[The JareBear]

Quote: Originally Posted by schumj

Prestige shouldn't be based on present it should be on present + history. Overall, Off and Def ratings are for present. Prestige is defined as high status or reputation achieved through success, influence, wealth, etc; renown. If you ask an average fan or anyone other than die hards who is more prestigious Tennessee or Missouri I am sure over half would say Tennessee.

I am sorry I just really disagree with this. Current quality of on-field play has to be a big chunk of that rating in the game or else actual wins and losses wouldnt mean anything.

[schumj]

Quote: Originally Posted by gohogs141

We finished around 32 in total D last year and were 2nd in the SEC in sacks and TFL...I think B+ is about right with 7 starters returning and a lot of seniors next year is a different story however...

I agree. I think they are a player or two stepping up from A-. Bequette is nasty and IMO the most underated player in the SEC with Kentucky's Danny Trevathan. 2 LB's are nice and your SS is primed for a big year.

[schumj]

Quote: Originally Posted by jaredlib

That's a good point Gloves. Also, I believe Mizzou has produced more NFL first rounders than UT in that time span too (could be wrong)

Well since 2000 Tulane has as many 1st rounders as Notre Dame. Should they be equal then?

[The JareBear]

I could spend all day arguing it, I am gonna bow out of this one. I just feel like there needs to be a bigger gap between Great defenses, Good defenses, and Decent defenses. Not every school should be rated the same just because they play in a big conference

[The JareBear]

Quote: Originally Posted by schumj

Well since 2000 Tulane has as many 1st rounders as Notre Dame. Should they be equal then?

That was just one stat and one aspect to look at on top of everything else. What is Tulane's record recently? How many big opponents have they beaten?

Probably not the same level as Notre Dame or Mizzou.

Mizzou has had a very successful run recently and been in NC title contention as well as Big 12 title contention

If history was all that mattered then Army and Navy would be 6* still and Miami would be a permanent 6* due to their dominance in the past 30 years or so. It changes year to year man, it should never stay the same just because of history. If you suck on the field your rating should go down. There should be a penalty or bonus or on field play year to year

[Sammidysam]

Haha Purdue got better than last year when they lost key star players like Ryan Kerrigan and Keith Smith. Although we'll never know if Purdue truly got better until the season is over.

[jhawk826]

Quote: Originally Posted by kingkilla56

Minus the Robinson era, Cuse's history is pretty rich compared to schools they have ranked ahead of us. I see you went to SU as well and you're probably one of the people who never went to a game or knew we had a program until we won a bowl game in December. Laugh it up if you want to.