01:34 PM - May 25, 2011 by prowlerThis video is also available on the OS Youtube channel, please subscribe while you're there.
Part one can be found here for those who missed it.
NCAA Football 12 News Post
01:34 PM - May 25, 2011 by prowlerThis video is also available on the OS Youtube channel, please subscribe while you're there.
Part one can be found here for those who missed it.
NCAA Football 12 Videos
Member Comments
|
|||||||||||||
|
But more to the point of the ratings issue; I agree there should only be a select few A+ rated coaches since there are no other ratings to offset it.
|
|||||||||||||
|
I think the CC is okay... but I don't care much... I was fine with just being offered contracts from bigger schools. I'm intrigued by starting off as an assistant tho
# 43
Tecmo Bowl @ 05/25/11 02:46 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 45
sparkdawg777 @ 05/25/11 02:53 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
Yeh, I'm not complaining about NCAA 12, it looks awesome. As a matter of fact I haven't been this excited about NCAA in a while. Honestly I wasn't sure if we were getting CC or not, found out we were and I jumped for joy. The fact that we can be an OC/DC I didn't expect and that makes a huge jump.
However when I found out that CC did not have coaches ratings and only relied on prestige that got me a little disappointed. Not enough to where I won't buy the game or even play dynasty it still will be great. But the reason I talk about the need for coaches ratings is only so more people can see how this can be expanded on next year. If everyone is satisfied then we will not see the improvement we could see.
I'm only going to mention this once but CH2k8 had coaches ratings and if the reason EA didn't go that route was a pride thing then that disappoints me even more. The coaches ratings are like the player ratings, someone invented player ratings a long time ago and now every game uses them. Well now that we have coaches in the game ratings for them are necessary as well because they have different attributes that make them great coaches. Lane Kiffin is a great at recruiting, but does not have much charisma. Nick Saban is one of the elite coaches that excels at every attribute along with a few other coaches. People need to see how much better the CC would be with ratings. This doesn't mean I think the CC this year is bad, but I do think it can be improved next year.
# 46
sparkdawg777 @ 05/25/11 02:57 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
You guys are ridiculous, please go back and read every post he has had. 1st he'll state his one opinion and then someone will bash him for it, so he will defend himself. The person you should be targeting are those who bash others opinions, not those who try to develop a coversation about how to improve the game.
I guess it all depends on how we or the game defines prestige. To me if you have won multiple conference championships and at least one national championship you should be in the A's. If you have never won a NC should not. Joe Pa, Spurrier, Saban, Stoops, Mack, Tressel, Les Miles should be A's. You can assign A-, A, A+ however but can't think of too many others deserving of an A. Once you reach a certain prestige you would have to totally fail to lose it or drastically go lower. I never get the Joe Pa doesn't belong cuz he hasn't won. He is still revered as one if not the greatest coach ever. Same with programs. I hate Notre Dame, they haven't been NC contender really since I was in kindergarten, but they are prestigious. Prestige is defined as a level of respect one has achieved. Joe Pa, Spurrier, Notre Dame achieved that level many years ago, probably before most of the readers and posters were born, but nevertheless they achieved it.
I think B's and B+ should have a lot of coaches. B+ should be the ones who have won a NC or are on the verge of being great but not proven it over enough time(Chizik, Kelly, etc) or coaches who have had winning programs over at least a decade (Mark Richt, Chris Peterson, Gary Patterson).
I think if you have never won a conference championship you should be no higher than a B. I love Bo Pelini think he is the greatest defensive mind in the game but he has not proven he is any higher than a B coach in my mind.
That also goes back to the fact of coordinators keeping their grades. It depends on what it means in the game. Pelini one of top DC before getting HC job, Weis is one of the greatest offensive minds, but obviously not a great HC. Same can be said for Al Groh in regards to DC, or Chuck Long, DeWayne Walker, Kevin Steele all great as coordinators not great as HC'S. There are exceptions as all HC started somewhere, but I can not believe that Gus Malzahn who is one of the best OC in the nation would automatically be one of the best HC's.
I think B's and B+ should have a lot of coaches. B+ should be the ones who have won a NC or are on the verge of being great but not proven it over enough time(Chizik, Kelly, etc) or coaches who have had winning programs over at least a decade (Mark Richt, Chris Peterson, Gary Patterson).
I think if you have never won a conference championship you should be no higher than a B. I love Bo Pelini think he is the greatest defensive mind in the game but he has not proven he is any higher than a B coach in my mind.
That also goes back to the fact of coordinators keeping their grades. It depends on what it means in the game. Pelini one of top DC before getting HC job, Weis is one of the greatest offensive minds, but obviously not a great HC. Same can be said for Al Groh in regards to DC, or Chuck Long, DeWayne Walker, Kevin Steele all great as coordinators not great as HC'S. There are exceptions as all HC started somewhere, but I can not believe that Gus Malzahn who is one of the best OC in the nation would automatically be one of the best HC's.
# 48
Tecmo Bowl @ 05/25/11 03:01 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 49
Tecmo Bowl @ 05/25/11 03:04 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 50
sparkdawg777 @ 05/25/11 03:14 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
Yeh the priorities around here are backwards. People settle too much, if you want improvements to a game you have to ask for it. Thankfully NCAA has great devs who listen to their community. We are not at all bashing them, they have taken a HUGE step in the right direction with everything from presentation to gameplay and to now CC, oh and RTG! However there is always room for improvement in every feature.
I have created a thread dedicated for those who want to see improvements and can discuss how to improve the CC for NCAA 13.
http://www.operationsports.com/forum...-carousel.html
His only agenda is to see a better game in the future. All for that, pretty sure most people here also share that same agenda.
Some people just take "negative" opinions the wrong way, like it's a personal attack on them.
Some people just take "negative" opinions the wrong way, like it's a personal attack on them.
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 54
Tecmo Bowl @ 05/25/11 03:21 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 56
Tecmo Bowl @ 05/25/11 03:23 PM
Sorry mod just saw your move on post. DOne. But the ratings of the coaches doesn't matter too much because we can change it. Some nice gentleman on this forum will name all of the coaches, players and adjust ratings and it'll be all good.
The coaches don't have ratings. Just prestige. It sucks, lol. More fun than before , but a long way to go
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 59
sparkdawg777 @ 05/25/11 03:34 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
Yeh I think you're right, I'm sure that the devs wanted ratings but the more I look at it (although I am no expert in creating software or whatever) I can see that it is a lot more work to tie the coach's ratings into the entire game than say just the coach prestige. I'm confident after seeing the improvements of this year's game that we will see coach ratings next year.
Post A Comment
Working...