Operation Sports Logo Header
Home
Operation Sports Logo Header
NCAA Football 14 News Post

EA Sports Will Not Publish College Football Game Next Year, Future Plans in Doubt

  05:23 PM - September 26, 2013 by FloorGeneral

Here is the official statement from EA Sports:

Quote:
"Today I am sad to announce that we will not be publishing a new college football game next year, and we are evaluating our plan for the future of the franchise. This is as profoundly disappointing to the people who make this game as I expect it will be for the millions who enjoy playing it each year. I’d like to explain a couple of the factors that brought us to this decision.

We have been stuck in the middle of a dispute between the NCAA and student-athletes who seek compensation for playing college football. Just like companies that broadcast college games and those that provide equipment and apparel, we follow rules that are set by the NCAA – but those rules are being challenged by some student-athletes. For our part, we are working to settle the lawsuits with the student-athletes. Meanwhile, the NCAA and a number of conferences have withdrawn their support of our game. The ongoing legal issues combined with increased questions surrounding schools and conferences have left us in a difficult position – one that challenges our ability to deliver an authentic sports experience, which is the very foundation of EA SPORTS games.

At EA SPORTS, college football has always been a labor of love, and it is unfortunate that these business and legal issues have impacted our ability to make next year’s game. This franchise has been developed by a team that is deeply committed to the tradition and culture of this sport – that’s why fans have always loved it. We are working to retain the talented people who are part of the team by placing them elsewhere within the EA SPORTS organization.

In the meantime, we will continue to be connected and engaged with our fans who are playing EA SPORTS NCAA Football. Our decision does not affect our commitment to NCAA Football 14 and the consumers who love playing the game."

Game: NCAA Football 14Reader Score: 8/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 54 - View All
NCAA Football 14 Videos
EA/NCAA Settlement, When Can We Expect NCAA Football to Return? Video
EA/NCAA Settlement, When Can We Expect NCAA Football to Return? EA/NCAA Settlement, When Can We Expect NCAA Football to Return? Video
OS Simulation: Alabama vs. Auburn NCG Video
OS Simulation: Alabama vs. Auburn NCG OS Simulation: Alabama vs. Auburn NCG Video
NCAA Football 14 Dynasty Mode Trailer Video
NCAA Football 14 Dynasty Mode Trailer NCAA Football 14 Dynasty Mode Trailer Video
NCAA Football 14 - Player Ratings (Top Players For Each Team) Video
NCAA Football 14 - Player Ratings (Top Players For Each Team) NCAA Football 14 - Player Ratings (Top Players For Each Team) Video
NCAA Football 14 Presentation Trailer Video
NCAA Football 14 Presentation Trailer NCAA Football 14 Presentation Trailer Video
NCAA Football 14 - Army vs. Navy Video
NCAA Football 14 - Army vs. Navy NCAA Football 14 - Army vs. Navy Video

Member Comments
# 441 coogrfan @ 10/02/13 11:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACardAttack
As would I!
I would say that by far the vast majority of cfb players over the years would have felt the same way. It wasn't until some scheming lawyer started whispering in the ears of a few disgruntled former players that they were being "exploited" that this became an issue. The real irony in all of this is that the only people who will wind up making any serious money out of this suit are the attorneys themselves.
 
# 442 da ThRONe @ 10/02/13 11:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EAGLESFAN10
But I would take it as a Honor to be featured in a game but that's just me
That's cool, but you should have a say in the matter.

Some people donate time, money, and items to charity, however charity isn't and shouldn't be mandatory.
 
# 443 coogrfan @ 10/02/13 12:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSoxFox7
That's still the case today, but that doesn't change the fact they should be consulted first, and they should have to give consent second.

If you went to the 11,000 some odd FBS football players and asked them if they wanted to be in NCAA Football 15, officially, you'd probably get 90-95% of them just doing it to get their real name and face in the game. The top 5-10% that stand a chance of being drafted some day are the ones who will want compensation for their consent - and they deserve it.

This isn't about saying the players should be paid to play by the schools. This is about the NCAA, CLC, and EA infringing the intellectual property rights of the players, and regardless of how you feel about players deserving pay, that is exploitation.
5-10%? More like 1-2%.

Are you familiar with the legal adage "hard cases make bad law"? If ever there was a classic example of the truth of that maxim, this is it. The notion of altering the entire landscape of college athletics for the sake of putting a few bucks in the pockets of such a miniscule fraction of the participants in cfb is, imho, utter folly.
 
# 444 coogrfan @ 10/02/13 12:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSoxFox7
That's still the case today, but that doesn't change the fact they should be consulted first, and they should have to give consent second.

If you went to the 11,000 some odd FBS football players and asked them if they wanted to be in NCAA Football 15, officially, you'd probably get 90-95% of them just doing it to get their real name and face in the game. The top 5-10% that stand a chance of being drafted some day are the ones who will want compensation for their consent - and they deserve it.

This isn't about saying the players should be paid to play by the schools. This is about the NCAA, CLC, and EA infringing the intellectual property rights of the players, and regardless of how you feel about players deserving pay, that is exploitation.
As opposed to the EA/CLC settlement, in which the individual players will reportedly walk away with less than $400 per person, while their lawyers will pocket $10 million plus. Now tell me again, who exactly is "exploiting" the players?
 
# 445 da ThRONe @ 10/02/13 12:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by coogrfan
As opposed to the EA/CLC settlement, in which the individual players will reportedly walk away with less than $400 per person, while their lawyers will pocket $10 million plus. Now tell me again, who exactly is "exploiting" the players?
This is a win for all scholarship athletes. They can no longer have their likeness used without their permission. I'm no fan of lawyers and they made out like bandits in all of this financially you'll get no argument from me there. However this case may be the base that gets SA a step closer to earning the right to be compensated for their likeness like the NCAA and EA has been doing for years.
 
# 446 coogrfan @ 10/02/13 12:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by da ThRONe
This is a win for all scholarship athletes. They can no longer have their likeness used without their permission. I'm no fan of lawyers and they made out like bandits in all of this financially you'll get no argument from me there. However this case may be the base that gets SA a step closer to earning the right to be compensated for their likeness like the NCAA and EA has been doing for years.
Imo, it's far more likely that the only result of all this will be that we've seen the last of college sports video games.

Thanks, guys. Don't spend it all in one place.
 
# 447 da ThRONe @ 10/02/13 01:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by coogrfan
Imo, it's far more likely that the only result of all this will be that we've seen the last of college sports video games.

Thanks, guys. Don't spend it all in one place.
If that's the case and we never get another collegiate game we have to ask why. The answer is EA was using SA's likeness without their permission point blank period.

EA could have made a game where the teams had completely random players. Since the actual players aren't that important.
 
# 448 Forestman @ 10/02/13 03:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by da ThRONe
If that's the case and we never get another collegiate game we have to ask why. The answer is EA was using SA's likeness without their permission point blank period.

EA could have made a game where the teams had completely random players. Since the actual players aren't that important.
Apparently that wouldn't have sold very well. They were pushing for authenticity which was in higher demand than ever before.
 
# 449 rspencer86 @ 10/02/13 04:13 PM
I know I can be a bit of a dreamer, but if EA or another company is bold enough to ever try making a game without a license, there would be some nice benefits:
  • Cost: Licensing all of the teams and bowls is a significant portion of the budget for this game (does anyone know the rough percentage? 10% 25%?). An unlicensed game would be much cheaper to produce, meaning more profit.
  • Less Restrictions: Academic fraud, recruiting violations, player misconduct, late hits, more celebrations could all be represented in the game without being fettered by the NCAA's tight restrictions.
  • Complete Customization: With no official team logos, uniforms or bowl games shipping with the game, complete customization is a must. But with no NCAA restrictions, customization could go even further, being able to tweak the playoff system or even the rules of the game itself.

It would be very tough to convince the consumer that an unlicensed game is worth buying. The game would have to feature incredibly strong gameplay, deep game modes, fantastic online functionality, and of course complete customization. And it would have to be smartly marketed, going after the true fanatics of college football. But I still think it is possible, and hopefully one day we will see it happen.
 
# 450 Forestman @ 10/02/13 04:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rspencer86
I know I can be a bit of a dreamer, but if EA or another company is bold enough to ever try making a game without a license, there would be some nice benefits:
  • Cost: Licensing all of the teams and bowls is a significant portion of the budget for this game (does anyone know the rough percentage? 10% 25%?). An unlicensed game would be much cheaper to produce, meaning more profit.
  • Less Restrictions: Academic fraud, recruiting violations, player misconduct, late hits, more celebrations could all be represented in the game without being fettered by the NCAA's tight restrictions.
  • Complete Customization: With no official team logos, uniforms or bowl games shipping with the game, complete customization is a must. But with no NCAA restrictions, customization could go even further, being able to tweak the playoff system or even the rules of the game itself.

It would be very tough to convince the consumer that an unlicensed game is worth buying. The game would have to feature incredibly strong gameplay, deep game modes, fantastic online functionality, and of course complete customization. And it would have to be smartly marketed, going after the true fanatics of college football. But I still think it is possible, and hopefully one day we will see it happen.
That is the exact problem. The general consumer wouldn't be "die hard" enough to go find the files, create files, or import files. They just wanna get on and play. Most people would have very little patience and that is why we most likely won't see something like this.
 
# 451 coogrfan @ 10/02/13 04:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSoxFox7
No, it's more like 5-10%. It's a little over 2% in any given year.
Fair enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSoxFox7
As far as "altering the entire landscape of college athletics" is concerned, please, spare us the senseless exaggerations. Allowing student athletes to make money on their own likeness would hardly change anything, and the biggest change we have now is a stop to EA/CLC/NCAA profiting from their unauthorized use of intellectual property.
"Senseless exaggerations"?

Would you not agree that providing a method by which the boosters of the big programs can funnel cash directly to players with no fear of any sort of repercussions would serve to tilt the (already unlevel) playing field overwhelmingly in favor of the "haves"? If that's not "altering the landscape", what would you call it?


Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSoxFox7
The NCAA is (was) exploiting them. The NCAA was illegally using their IP (and that of many others not involved in the suit) for years. The terms of the EA/CLC settlement are irrelevant here.
I was under the impression that this has yet to be determined? It's my understanding that the NCAA has stated they will fight this all the way to the Supreme Court. Given the SCOTUS's history of reversing a very high % of 9th Circuit decisions, any victory by the plaintiffs may well be short lived. We'll see.
 
# 452 jwilphl @ 10/02/13 06:43 PM
Dammit, NCAA!



I blame them more than anything. Their little sham organization has gone from exploiting athletes to now crushing consumerism. They refuse to amend their rules and simply raise licensing costs. I admit the lawsuit itself hasn't solved anything considering it has settled out of court. O'Bannon only wanted a cash grab (ironically he'll be lucky to get $250), but he did have an underlying point.

The NCAA needs to let players market themselves however they wish and dismantle the "amateurism" sham that has only existed so the NCAA can go on not paying players. I don't think allowing the NCAA to directly pay players is any type of answer - you run into a whole slew of problems. But if Guy X sells his autograph for some dollars, let him. Don't turn around and say because he did so, he can no longer play college athletics. It makes no sense.

Let the market itself handle how much college players are worth. For those of you familiar with former Colorado football player Jeremy Bloom, the NCAA wanted to disavow his football eligibility because he was receiving sponsorship money from his time as a professional skier and model. It's nonsense.
 
# 453 GoDevils95 @ 10/02/13 11:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnDoe8865
I clearly stated next-gen.

EA had said that for example, if you owned PS3 NCAA 14 and bought PS4 M25, you could import draft classes across into the NG version. Then they retracted that.
Thank you !!
 
# 454 coogrfan @ 10/03/13 12:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSoxFox7
I'd call it exactly what's already happening. How do you think the "haves" got that way in the first place? What do you think Phil Knight's doing with the $300 million he's given to Oregon? Letting boosters come out from behind the shadows isn't going to change where the recruits are going.
You seem to be implying that the imbalance between the "haves and have nots" can't possibly get any worse. I strongly disagree. The current situation has come about while the big programs are (at least theoretically) constrained by NCAA rules. If the big programs and their boosters can dominate the sport with one hand tied behind their backs, what do suppose will happen if those folks were suddenly free to spend without limit?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSoxFox7
If anything, it might give the lesser programs a chance to become competitive more quickly.
You can't be serious. The smaller programs simply don't have the resources to compete for players in a totally unfettered marketplace.

It's far more likely that we would see something similar to the situation that existed prior to the imposition of scholarship limits in the early 70's. In those days the big schools routinely fielded teams of 100+ players because they were giving full ride scholarships to players simply to keep those kids from playing for someone else. Freeing boosters to pay players would allow the big schools to return to that sordid practice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSoxFox7
EA's actions over the past week make it pretty clear how they expect it to be decided, assuming the NCAA doesn't also settle.
That's one way of looking at it. Imo EA and the CLC determined that the risk of continuing to fight outweighed any possible reward. That doesn't necessarily mean that either party believed they were sure to lose, it just means they weren't sure they would win.
 
# 455 Cardot @ 10/03/13 09:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rspencer86
I know I can be a bit of a dreamer, but if EA or another company is bold enough to ever try making a game without a license, there would be some nice benefits:
  • Cost: Licensing all of the teams and bowls is a significant portion of the budget for this game (does anyone know the rough percentage? 10% 25%?). An unlicensed game would be much cheaper to produce, meaning more profit.
  • Less Restrictions: Academic fraud, recruiting violations, player misconduct, late hits, more celebrations could all be represented in the game without being fettered by the NCAA's tight restrictions.
  • Complete Customization: With no official team logos, uniforms or bowl games shipping with the game, complete customization is a must. But with no NCAA restrictions, customization could go even further, being able to tweak the playoff system or even the rules of the game itself.

It would be very tough to convince the consumer that an unlicensed game is worth buying. The game would have to feature incredibly strong gameplay, deep game modes, fantastic online functionality, and of course complete customization. And it would have to be smartly marketed, going after the true fanatics of college football. But I still think it is possible, and hopefully one day we will see it happen.
And they wouldn't have to spend a great deal of effort of coming up with ratings for 50+ on 120+ teams.

And maybe the fans can finally tear down the goalposts that we almost had in 2004?

Two questions that I would have is are there enough people who are willing to create/share rosters? I am inclined to say "No", however EA did invest effort into creating and promoting Team Builder. So there must be a certain percentage of gamers who use it?

And secondly, are there any legal precedence for a company creating customizable material which users can then modify and share?

The sad part is that EA already has much of this in place. It would have to be expanded, but there is already customizable conferences, team builder, custom sounds etc.
 
# 456 ncaa98 @ 10/06/13 01:30 AM
This makes me not even want to play NCAA 14 and just go buy MADDEN and start learning it. This will hurt college football rating to TV as well.
 
# 457 kehlis @ 10/06/13 12:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncaa98
This makes me not even want to play NCAA 14 and just go buy MADDEN and start learning it. This will hurt college football rating to TV as well.
lol, no it won't.
 
# 458 Forestman @ 10/06/13 01:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncaa98
This makes me not even want to play NCAA 14 and just go buy MADDEN and start learning it. This will hurt college football rating to TV as well.
As odd as it may be, it's making me loose some interest in college football. Sad, I know.

I have hope the future calls for another college football game. Just need time to let this wound heal.
 
# 459 fistofrage @ 10/09/13 03:56 PM
The series was stale and headed no where. The DB glitch killed the last two years. This is a good thing they are shutting it down. It will most likely return some day and then hopefully it will be with a fresh engine and better atmosphere.
 
# 460 coogrfan @ 12/15/13 01:34 PM
Houston posted some very NCAA-ish renderings of our new stadium last week that reminded me just how much it sucks that I'll never get to play in the place.








That dude in the red jacket really gets around.
 


Post A Comment
Only OS members can post comments
Please login or register to post a comment.