NCAA Football 11 News Post

NCAA's Broken Dynasty Mode -- Another reason we need a revolution

02:30 PM - July 27, 2010 by RaychelSnr

As many of you may know already -- and if you don't it's okay because I'm about to enlighten you -- NCAA's dynasty mode is horribly broken this year.

Since EA Tiburon made the decision to rate recruits lower coming into school (but yet I guess forget to work on the progression of the game), most teams end up with middle of the road talent after years 4 or 5. It's like all of the football talent in America dries up after this year and all you are left with are a bunch of players rated in the 70s. I did a sim to see how bad it was and my Oklahoma Sooners went from a team with A ratings to a team with C+ ratings, yet they still won the Big XII in Year 7 with that kind of talent. Mostly because Texas had slipped to a team with C-s across the board. Baylor actually was rated as D+ (roughly where such powerhouses as UL Monroe and Western Kentucky lie today).

To me -- this just shows how horribly stale Dynasty mode is in NCAA.

Read More - NCAA's Broken Dynasty Mode -- Another reason we need a revolution

Game: NCAA Football 11Reader Score: 8/10 - Vote Now
Platform: iPhone / PS2 / PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 83 - View All

NCAA Football 11 Videos

Member Comments

# 121 Cwb917 @ 07/28/10 07:21 PM

The thing that stinks the most is that this is the most fun I, and I assume, many others have had playing NCAA in years. It stinks that the majority of us will trade this in towards madden since we have no timetable for a fix on this issue.

# 122 jfsolo @ 07/28/10 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cwb917


	The thing that stinks the most is that this is the most fun I, and I assume, many others have had playing NCAA in years. It stinks that the majority of us will trade this in towards madden since we have no timetable for a fix on this issue.

A few will trade it in for Madden, but if you look at the poll in this forum, it may not be that many. Since they didn't do much to Franchise mode, I'm passing on Madden this year, and won't be getting any other game until NBA 2K11 comes out.

I plan on playing this game for months and months so I will wait on the patch and won't abandon the game.

From my perspective as a layman, the issues I have with the game seem like they should be easily fixable.

# 123 BroMontana82 @ 07/28/10 08:32 PM

i didn't even know about this. i'm in year 1. so basically, the problem starts when? a few years in? is there hope a patch would fix existing dynasties?

# 124 charter04 @ 07/28/10 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beauforsure


	I AGREE with what this guy is saying... I think MADDEN will have a better system when importing classes from NCAA. Im looking at my Virgina roster right now, and i have maybe 3 good players and 2 impacts. So this is life-like...there shouldnt be a STAR at every postion. The progrssion does seem a little slow, and i agree with the AWR being really low... If i were doing it, i would just have whatever rating the player is in NCAA , when you imported him , he stayed the same exactly...ratings,number,equipment , etc... So if my DE was rated an 86 OVR hed come to MADDEN with that rating.. Also, if they do patch this , THEY NEED TO MAKE IT PERFORMANCE PROGRESSION !! A guy who throws for 40 td and 9 ints, should progress at least +6 going into next year...

That would be terrible. I guy thats 99 over could be the best player in the league as a rookie. They should make the speed, acc, agility, type of ratings stay the same. The AWR, play reg, and stuff like that should be like 60 or something. This would make their overall the way rookies should be but not have spiller or some really fast player loss all speed as a rookie.

# 125 b2smooth @ 07/28/10 08:33 PM

You know I remember this time last year everybody was complaining about how players progressed too much. Now they don't progress enough and they come in with low ratings. No matter what they do people will find something to complain about. And if you think about it how many freshman per team actually start each year on average. Granted some standouts do but most don't see the field or get redshirted and don't see the field the next season either.

# 126 RumbleCard @ 07/28/10 08:43 PM

I don't mind lower ratings. I don't mind lower ratings of 4 and 5 star incoming recruits. I don't mind that the league isn't filled with 150 90+ rated players.

They have to find a mix here. If they could make it to where we'd see a handful of 90+ rated players along with a slight bump in progression...and I mean slight. We'd have a solid game.

# 127 dan_457 @ 07/28/10 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by b2smooth


	You know I remember this time last year everybody was complaining about how players progressed too much. Now they don't progress enough and they come in with low ratings. No matter what they do people will find something to complain about. And if you think about it how many freshman per team actually start each year on average. Granted some standouts do but most don't see the field or get redshirted and don't see the field the next season either.

People have a right to complain about it, they had it done right last year post-patch, and for some reason decided to abandon what they had, and start over with a new method, that doesn't even look like they thought out. And none of this about freshman starting, I'm playing past the original rosters now, and my entire starting D-line are all true freshman, all over 80 as well. So if someones concerned about that, they shouldn't be. It's more about the recruits just being rated too low, namely 80% of the 3* and all of the 2 and 1*.

# 128 blkraven1 @ 07/28/10 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by charter04


	That would be terrible. I guy thats 99 over could be the best player in the league as a rookie. They should make the speed, acc, agility, type of ratings stay the same. The AWR, play reg, and stuff like that should be like 60 or something. This would make their overall the way rookies should be but not have spiller or some really fast player loss all speed as a rookie.

But see thats the point...there are really no 99 rated players in the game because they dont progress to that level like they used to...i think having the ratings spread out is a good thing for madden..it makes the transition alot smoother...am i only one of the very few who see's this as a good thing? i enjoy seeing good players dominate over a lesser team or player...it makes having good players fun to play with...they wont be as dominant when they reach the nfl...that to me is a step in the right direction for EA, if in fact this is how they intended progression to be for NCAA...

# 129 mgoblue678 @ 07/28/10 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by b2smooth


	You know I remember this time last year everybody was complaining about how players progressed too much. Now they don't progress enough and they come in with low ratings. No matter what they do people will find something to complain about. And if you think about it how many freshman per team actually start each year on average. Granted some standouts do but most don't see the field or get redshirted and don't see the field the next season either.

And that would be fine if those guys were ready to contribute by their 2nd or 3rd year, but that is not the case . With how low alot of the recruits come in even by their 2nd and 3rd year a good number are still terrible. Some still may end starting, but only because the players around them at their position are even more terrible.

And just so people understand the majority of the issues people have is how low the recruits come in and other assorted issues such as how many 1* recruits there are not progression. The only progression issues I can think of is players not progressing during the season as they get playing time and awareness not progressing faster.

I really don't understand why some people are continuing to try and rationalize that there isn't a problem. I understand it may be as big as a problem for some people, but it doesn't mean there isn't one that needs to be addressed.

I don't think some comprehend the real issues. I keep on seeing arguments like " while there shouldn't be a ton of 90+ players, so I think it's a good thing." If they read two seconds to actually read the issues people have, they would understand the people having the issues don't want that to be the case either. The recruits people want raised is the lower recruits the 2* and 3* particularly which in no way shape or form would lead to a abundance of 90+ players. Nobody is saying those guys should come in the at a ridiculous level, just a level high enough where some of them are not as terrible. Honestly I am almost done arguing at this point, it is like talking to a brick wall in some cases.

# 130 Romeclone @ 07/28/10 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by b2smooth


	You know I remember this time last year everybody was complaining about how players progressed too much. Now they don't progress enough and they come in with low ratings. No matter what they do people will find something to complain about. And if you think about it how many freshman per team actually start each year on average. Granted some standouts do but most don't see the field or get redshirted and don't see the field the next season either.

Well yes, to be honest it was bad last year and worse this year. At least IMHO last year even though there were way too many good players it still provided a good challenge in your non confrence games. Last year if I was playing with say Kentucky 10 years in I could schedule Bowling Green or WKU as my first non-confrence game and still have a legit opponent. This year, you can forget it. Over half the teams are utter garbage after a few years that have no business being in a college football game.

Not to mention the Madden draft classes. Last year there were too many good players but they still came in with decent skill and AWR ratings. This year, generated NCAA players will be worthless against stock Madden players that have been in the NFL for 7-12 years. So if you think that it's bad in NCAA you are correct but it will have an even worse effect in Madden.

# 131 blkraven1 @ 07/28/10 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Romeclone


	Well yes, to be honest it was bad last year and worse this year. At least IMHO last year even though there were way too many good players it still provided a good challenge in your non confrence games. Last year if I was playing with say Kentucky 10 years in I could schedule Bowling Green or WKU as my first non-confrence game and still have a legit opponent. This year, you can forget it. Over half the teams are utter garbage after a few years that have no business being in a college football game. Not to mention the Madden draft classes. Last year there were too many good players but they still came in with decent skill and AWR ratings. This year, generated NCAA players will be worthless against stock Madden players that have been in the NFL for 7-12 years. So if you think that it's bad in NCAA you are correct but it will have an even worse effect in Madden.

U have to remember, only the BEST players from NCAA are draft-able...and maybe only maybe 2 to 3 players in each position will be superstars...thats true to life... look at last yrs draft...how many ppl can u name other than Mark Sanchez, Brian Cushing, or maybe Orakpo, off the top of ur head, who made an instant impact in the NFL?

# 132 mgoblue678 @ 07/28/10 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blkraven1


	U have to remember, only the BEST players from NCAA are draft-able...and maybe only maybe 2 to 3 players in each position will be superstars...thats true to life... look at last yrs draft...how many ppl can u name other than Mark Sanchez, Brian Cushing, or maybe Orakpo, off the top of ur head, who made an instant impact in the NFL?

But this is irrelevant to the real issues most people have. Raising the 2* and 3* players a little bit would not result in a bunch of superstars. The 4* and 5* players are fine for the most part. The only issue with them is the extremely low awareness ratings for some of them and other than QB's raising awareness has very little impact on their overalls.

And yes I know you were just responding to the other guy, but I just wanted to clarify that this argument does not really apply to the main issues people have.

# 133 Romeclone @ 07/28/10 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blkraven1


	U have to remember, only the BEST players from NCAA are draft-able...and maybe only maybe 2 to 3 players in each position will be superstars...thats true to life... look at last yrs draft...how many ppl can u name other than Mark Sanchez, Brian Cushing, or maybe Orakpo, off the top of ur head, who made an instant impact in the NFL?

No I agree with what you are saying 100 percent maybe I should put it this way.

This year NCAA has two rating sets. Stock NCAA players and post stock generated recruits.

The post stock generated players will have far less agility, spin, juke moves than the Stock players.

In NCAA it only takes four years to clean the game of the Stock players with legit skill position ratings. However, once they hit Madden, they will be in that game for 7-12 YEARS.

Then you will see the wave of NCAA deaf dumb and stupid players hit the NFL alongside the Stock NCAA players which won't match up with the Stock NCAA players.

So in NCAA the all is things balance out argument is fine after 4 years. But in Madden it will go on for 10 -12 years.

# 134 Bumble14 @ 07/28/10 09:08 PM

For those of you who actually play every game of dynasty mode, at what year did the game become completely unplayable due to low rated CPU opponent players?

I just advanced to year 3 and have yet to see the issue on the field. I don't care about sim stats or ratings, I want to know the year that you begin seeing CPU opponents all being garbage on the field. What I mean by this is when playing the no 1 team in the country, what year does your team simply roll them because they have no kicker, all wideouts are really TEs, and the qb is a 50 ovr.

Not saying issues don't exist, just I think it needs to be clariified for the non ocd gamers out there that the game isn't broken. Let them know how many solid years of dynasty can be played before the wheels come off.

# 135 Romeclone @ 07/28/10 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bumble14


	For those of you who actually play every game of dynasty mode, at what year did the game become completely unplayable due to low rated CPU opponent players? I just advanced to year 3 and have yet to see the issue on the field. I don't care about sim stats or ratings, I want to know the year that you begin seeing CPU opponents all being garbage on the field. What I mean by this is when playing the no 1 team in the country, what year does your team simply roll them because they have no kicker, all wideouts are really TEs, and the qb is a 50 ovr. Not saying issues don't exist, just I think it needs to be clariified for the non ocd gamers out there that the game isn't broken. Let them know how many solid years of dynasty can be played before the wheels come off.

You should start to see problems now to be honest depending on who you are playing with it could be minor at that point. After all the Stock players are gone in year 5 you should really see some problems and by year 10 the weaker teams are sooooo bad they are not worth playing.

And let me clarify, that the power teams in power confrences still have really good players. If you play as a power team in a power conference you should be able to play the game and enjoy it for years and years so long as you don't schedule any weak non BCS teams. If you are playing in the MAC or WAC by year five it just won't be the same type of game you were used to playng with the stock rosters. Almost no talent on those teams after year 5.

And one more thing... I have a dynasty saved in 2019 so if anyone has any questions about the roster makeup or ratings you can PM me or somthing and I would be glad to tell you what's going on. But, I can tell you, for the weaker teams... total garbage rosters. There are entire teams that don't have one player rated in the 60's. The entire teams are like 58-40.

# 136 mgoblue678 @ 07/28/10 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bumble14


	For those of you who actually play every game of dynasty mode, at what year did the game become completely unplayable due to low rated CPU opponent players? I just advanced to year 3 and have yet to see the issue on the field. I don't care about sim stats or ratings, I want to know the year that you begin seeing CPU opponents all being garbage on the field. What I mean by this is when playing the no 1 team in the country, what year does your team simply roll them because they have no kicker, all wideouts are really TEs, and the qb is a 50 ovr. Not saying issues don't exist, just I think it needs to be clariified for the non ocd gamers out there that the game isn't broken. Let them know how many solid years of dynasty can be played before the wheels come off.

I think most of the people testing have said the 4th or 5th year when all the players of the default roster are gone. I don't think you would see it in the 3rd year since there are still players from the default roster.

You do bring up a point though, people who like to only play 3 or 4 years wouldn't see the issues for the most part. Personally I like to play until all my team is made up of only the players I recruited and play for a couple of years with them.

# 137 blkraven1 @ 07/28/10 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Romeclone


	No I agree with what you are saying 100 percent maybe I should put it this way. This year NCAA has two rating sets. Stock NCAA players and post stock generated recruits. The post stock generated players will have far less agility, spin, juke moves than the Stock players. In NCAA it only takes four years to clean the game of the Stock players with legit skill position ratings. However, once they hit Madden, they will be in that game for 7-12 YEARS. Then you will see the wave of NCAA deaf dumb and stupid players hit the NFL alongside the Stock NCAA players which won't match up with the Stock NCAA players. So in NCAA the all is things balance out argument is fine after 4 years. But in Madden it will go on for 10 -12 years.

Good point...Maybe we will only REALLY be able to tell once we get madden and see how this dynamic works...im thinking tho...most of the good players in madden are getting old...could it be that they over stocked NCAA with good players so that madden would stay with plenty of elite players before all the good ones retire? Or am i giving EA too much credit?

# 138 Buckeyes_Doc @ 07/28/10 10:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cincy sean


	btw Im simming into year 7 to see what the final results are

Would you mind playing a game in year 7 to see how gameplay is effected by the poor ratings?

# 139 dan_457 @ 07/28/10 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buckeyes_Doc


	Would you mind playing a game in year 7 to see how gameplay is effected by the poor ratings?

It's not that quite simple, considering that it's actually a subjective topic. I can give you my opinion though, that's all anyone can really do here. I'm in 2019, i simmed from 2010 to 2016 and started in 2017 in order to cycle out all the old players, and so that i could get a good job offer. Anyway, I use Playmakers sliders, and the game plays well, but i don't think it's as good as it was with the default rosters, my first dynasty, year 1 was my best, most fun year ever. If you ask it's not a massive difference, but i can notice that some things feel a little off.

I will throw out that QB's and a lot of defensive players do seem dumber in general, and this does coincide with lower AWR. So if you ask me, the lower AWR is one of the biggest problems, along with the kickers, we have here.

# 140 Buckeyes_Doc @ 07/28/10 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cincy sean


	sure thing, that is a good idea, will let you know Im through year 3 right know and I think difficulty MIGHT have something to do with this. Nothing to crazy yet, The kickers still have good Kick power ratings so..........

Thanks, appreciate it.

Are you playing default varsity?

« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 678 9 10 Next »

More Links

NCAA's Broken Dynasty Mode -- Another reason we need a revolution