NCAA Football 13 News Post

NCAA Football 13 Recruiting Database (TSO)

01:48 AM - May 10, 2012 by Steve_OS

The crew at Tradition Sports Online have posted this interesting NCAA Football 13 recruiting database article.

If you are the type of person that can't stand the unrealistic 6'4" 175 wide receiver or 6’5” 180 defensive end recruits, make sure you give it a read.

Quote:


	For several years now, most would agree that the recruiting features of NCAA Football have taken huge steps in creating a deep, realistic experience. However, for those of you who are recruiting enthusiasts like me, it can be hard to authenticate certain recruits when you know that their measurables would never lend them to their position in real life. Coupled with the fact that there is little to no growth or weight progression in the game and the end result is some really unrealistic player models.

Game: NCAA Football 13Reader Score: 7/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 60 - View All

NCAA Football 13 Videos

Member Comments

# 1 Potatoes002 @ 05/10/12 02:26 AM

Hopefully this means the death of the 6'2" 180lb power runningbacks.

# 2 woody56 @ 05/10/12 02:29 AM

Some good and some bad in that article.

# 3 The_Wise_One @ 05/10/12 04:05 AM

One of those "little things" that could make the game feel more realistic

# 4 rudyjuly2 @ 05/10/12 05:57 AM

Just raising the minimum weight isn't good enough. The problem is the weights were completely random for every position. They had NOTHING to do with ratings. That's the problem. A power back could be 175 pounds. A scat back could weigh 230. A run stopping DE for me one year was 6'7" and 197 pounds. These are big problems imo.

They need to keep some of the weight random but tie weight into a few core attributes. For example at RB you could have weight tied into speed, agility, acceleration, trucking and strength. I put together a spreadsheet that would show how this worked: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArB9QSYxv2ZGdGZiOFBHQXhPY3YybWdQT2JaSUtJa UE&hl=en_US#gid=2

Just download the spreadsheet and play with the RB and OL attributes and see how it works. It's quite simple and would work a lot better than the current 100% random factors they have. At the very least the minimums and maximums of each position should be changed by tendency. Power back minimums should be higher.

# 5 feeq14 @ 05/10/12 07:52 AM

So what is the purpose of this? Did they get this in the game or do they expect us to go through each recruit and change their weight? I recognize the issue but i hope there is an easier fix than "Change everyone yourself/wait til next year"

Also their symbol looks like a uterus. Just thought i would point that out.

# 6 RynoAid @ 05/10/12 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by feeq14


	So what is the purpose of this? Did they get this in the game or do they expect us to go through each recruit and change their weight? I recognize the issue but i hope there is an easier fix than "Change everyone yourself/wait til next year" Also their symbol looks like a uterus. Just thought i would point that out.

" As a result, Shaun and I offered to take a look at their recruit database and see what changes we could make to help the generated recruiting classes make more sense."

they made the changes in the game... and thanks for the design feedback..

i was going for a placenta....

# 7 shaunlmason @ 05/10/12 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rudyjuly2


	Just raising the minimum weight isn't good enough. The problem is the weights were completely random for every position. They had NOTHING to do with ratings. That's the problem. A power back could be 175 pounds. A scat back could weigh 230. A run stopping DE for me one year was 6'7" and 197 pounds. These are big problems imo. They need to keep some of the weight random but tie weight into a few core attributes. For example at RB you could have weight tied into speed, agility, acceleration, trucking and strength. I put together a spreadsheet that would show how this worked: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArB9QSYxv2ZGdGZiOFBHQXhPY3YybWdQT2JaSUtJa UE&hl=en_US#gid=2 Just download the spreadsheet and play with the RB and OL attributes and see how it works. It's quite simple and would work a lot better than the current 100% random factors they have. At the very least the minimums and maximums of each position should be changed by tendency. Power back minimums should be higher.

Agree wholeheartedly.

Like it says in the article, we have a ton of improvements for the generation of recruits but such a drastic change was too much of a time investment this cycle.

# 8 feeq14 @ 05/10/12 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RynoAid


	" As a result, Shaun and I offered to take a look at their recruit database and see what changes we could make to help the generated recruiting classes make more sense." they made the changes in the game... and thanks for the design feedback.. i was going for a placenta....

In that case kudos. Im just so used to the community coming up with their own fixes for gameplay flaws (i repurchased NCAA12 last week and spent the first 5 hours creating playbooks without four verticles or screenpasses) it gets annoying to see gameplay fixes before the game is even out. Good job on getting it in. And nothing wrong with the uterus, its the most important organ in the history of life...

# 9 vanderbiltfan87 @ 05/10/12 10:29 AM

Great work guys. This has been an issue for years and is so hard to ignore while playing dynasty. Hopefully next year the developers can add something of a weight and conditioning program, if you will, to emulate real life. So many recruits come in undersized but have a frame which can support lots of weight gain. It's not uncommon to see an OT or DE put on 40 pounds over a year or two. (I mean, I hit the gym a year ago and have put on 20 pounds) It would really add another level to dynasty mode if while recruiting, there was a way to check how close a recruit is to filling out his body. Maybe there's a 6'4 255 pound TE with great feet and blocking skills, and you have an extra scholarship to use but may not see an OT that has what you're looking for. Well, sign the TE and redshirt him and watch him grow. Of course, 85 man rosters would make this more fun, but that's another story. Anyway, thanks for the input.

# 10 NDAlum @ 05/10/12 10:40 AM

Small step in the right direction

# 11 brza37 @ 05/10/12 10:43 AM

I think its a good start but I think the bigger problem is that players do not gain weight in NCAA. In real life a lot of guys will put on 15-20 pounds during their college careers.

And I like your proposed system better than the old one but I think the top end is a bit too heavy in what you proposed. There just aren't many 6'5" WR coming out of HS at 220. There are 6'5" DEs that come out at 220 but get FBS scholarships because they have a good burst and a wide frame that the coaches know they can pack another 30 pounds minimum onto.

But like I said I like your system much better and I'm glad you got them to change.

I think the next step has to be linking tendencies with weight as rudy suggested. No more 5'8" 170 lb possession receivers or powerbacks. Then they need to fix weight progression during the careers.

If every recruit randomly gained between 0 and 4% weight each year that wouldn't be realistic either though. Weight progression should ideally be a hidden value like Potential attached to each individual recruit. Some guys can gain weight while others can't. That should allow for still having guys like Desean Jackson graduate at roughly the same weight as he came in but also allow for others who started off as WRs to gain so much bulk they get moved to TE or LB to DE.

EDIT: Oops, I see someone already brought up my point. I forgot to hit send and Vanderbiltfan kinda stole my point in the meantime

# 12 jfsolo @ 05/10/12 10:46 AM

This may be only an aesthetic change for this year, but for me, a tweak like this adds to my level of immersion much more than any improved aspects of presentation.

Many may consider this a small thing, but for members of the community to get them to take the first step to finally fixing something that has been sub par forever, is a job well done. Good work guys.

# 13 vanderbiltfan87 @ 05/10/12 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brza37


	I think its a good start but I think the bigger problem is that players do not gain weight in NCAA. In real life a lot of guys will put on 15-20 pounds during their college careers. And I like your proposed system better than the old one but I think the top end is a bit too heavy in what you proposed. There just aren't many 6'5" WR coming out of HS at 220. There are 6'5" DEs that come out at 220 but get FBS scholarships because they have a good burst and a wide frame that the coaches know they can pack another 30 pounds minimum onto. But like I said I like your system much better and I'm glad you got them to change. I think the next step has to be linking tendencies with weight as rudy suggested. No more 5'8" 170 lb possession receivers or powerbacks. Then they need to fix weight progression during the careers. If every recruit randomly gained between 0 and 4% weight each year that wouldn't be realistic either though. Weight progression should ideally be a hidden value like Potential attached to each individual recruit. Some guys can gain weight while others can't. That should allow for still having guys like Desean Jackson graduate at roughly the same weight as he came in but also allow for others who started off as WRs to gain so much bulk they get moved to TE or LB to DE. EDIT: Oops, I see someone already brought up my point. I forgot to hit send and Vanderbiltfan kinda stole my point in the meantime

It's a point that I feel could not be reiterated enough. That was my first post on here in probably a year if that tells you anything.

# 14 shaunlmason @ 05/10/12 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brza37


	I think its a good start but I think the bigger problem is that players do not gain weight in NCAA. In real life a lot of guys will put on 15-20 pounds during their college careers. And I like your proposed system better than the old one but I think the top end is a bit too heavy in what you proposed. There just aren't many 6'5" WR coming out of HS at 220. There are 6'5" DEs that come out at 220 but get FBS scholarships because they have a good burst and a wide frame that the coaches know they can pack another 30 pounds minimum onto. But like I said I like your system much better and I'm glad you got them to change. I think the next step has to be linking tendencies with weight as rudy suggested. No more 5'8" 170 lb possession receivers or powerbacks. Then they need to fix weight progression during the careers. If every recruit randomly gained between 0 and 4% weight each year that wouldn't be realistic either though. Weight progression should ideally be a hidden value like Potential attached to each individual recruit. Some guys can gain weight while others can't. That should allow for still having guys like Desean Jackson graduate at roughly the same weight as he came in but also allow for others who started off as WRs to gain so much bulk they get moved to TE or LB to DE. EDIT: Oops, I see someone already brought up my point. I forgot to hit send and Vanderbiltfan kinda stole my point in the meantime

We decided it would be better to represent senior weights since they don't gain weight realistically.

# 15 BenGerman @ 05/10/12 12:54 PM

Just another reason a global editor would have won over so many hearts here at OS.

# 16 jmik58 @ 05/10/12 01:56 PM

The bigger question is whether or not this is just a cosmetic issue. In other words, does it really matter on the field for gameplay?

Does weight matter in EA's football games? I've yet to see that it does.

# 17 DorianDonP @ 05/10/12 02:03 PM

A 6'4 175 pound receiver in high school is not unrealistic. There are several guys in the current rivals 100 that are almost that size.

The big issue is that the guys don't gain weight (only a few pounds in some instances) and their size really doesn't relate to their attributes.

There should be some kind of weight training in the off-season where you can bulk up some guys. It would actually be kind of fun to go after a 6'4 200 pound defensive end, and weight train him for five years, and after his redshirt senior season have him be a 6'4 240 pound beast pass rusher.

# 18 Buckguy @ 05/10/12 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rudyjuly2


	Just raising the minimum weight isn't good enough. The problem is the weights were completely random for every position. They had NOTHING to do with ratings. That's the problem. A power back could be 175 pounds. A scat back could weigh 230. A run stopping DE for me one year was 6'7" and 197 pounds. These are big problems imo. They need to keep some of the weight random but tie weight into a few core attributes. For example at RB you could have weight tied into speed, agility, acceleration, trucking and strength. I put together a spreadsheet that would show how this worked

The problem is that you can't tie in attributes to weights as there are too many big Athletes out there now who run 4.3s, 4.4s, or 4.5s that are 200+. for Ex. tOSU has a power back that runs low 4.4s to high 4.3s and he is 235+ but the game is gonna give him a 87-92 speed but give a guy who is 180lbs. with the same speed a 92-95. The main issue is that the game gives random attribute packages to recruits and based on those rating they tell you what type of player they are at that position. Just like if you were to create a player as you change his ratings his player type changes as well. They need to have base set of ratings for each type of player at every position and have it change +/- based on caliber, size, a bit of randomness, and add some form of "true" physical development. This will keep players from being cookie cutter while at the same time giving us what we want in player types that match size & skill. Maybe you still get a 6'4" 185lbs. DE but when he is a Sr. he'll be 6'4" 230lbs. that is something that happens in college football.

# 19 smuurph84 @ 05/10/12 04:20 PM

Shaun, thanks for all the feedback on the site, really getting my hopes up for this year. a question on progression. is random progression in this year or do they all progress pretty much the exact same as last year. you mention it in the column and said you guys had a ton of ideas for next year. I am just curious if all recruits progress almost exactly the same. after about 4 years of recruiting in 12 I could tell you exactly what every guy I landed would be 3-4 years down the road. really brought down the dynasty experience as playing time stats etc had no effect on progression. any info would be great

thanks

# 20 blkrptnt819 @ 05/10/12 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rudyjuly2


	A power back could be 175 pounds. A scat back could weigh 230.

Can happen. I have seen it with my own 2 eyes

« Previous12 Next »

More Links

NCAA Football 13 Recruiting Database (TSO)