irishpat183
Banned
- Messages
- 5,625
- Reaction score
- 504
No kidding, I feel like a coach in the SEC
So you pay them too??
No kidding, I feel like a coach in the SEC
No kidding, I feel like a coach in the SEC
With ratings like those I won't have a single problem winning national championships every year on heisman.
The Dame dynasty will wait for LuvToTha9s rosters though.
Ratings will probaly look somthing like this
Best 3
Floyd-97
Teo-96
H smith- 91
QB
Crist- 86
Reese-82
Hendrix- 79
Goloston- 76
RB
C Wood- 87
J Gray- 80
WR
Riddick-89
Jones-84
Goodman-82
Toma- 81
Walker-80
Daniels- 78
TE
Effiert-86
Ragone- 83
Golic-80
Koyak-79
OL
Martin-85
Watt-83
Cave-84
Robinson-87
Dever-85
DT
Nix-80
Cawyner-80
DE
E Johnson- 85
Lewis Moore- 84
Lynch-82
Tuit- 80
Schwenke- 77
OLB
Fleming - 86
Shembo- 82
I Williams- 81
Filer-80
Spond- 79
ILB
Calbrese- 82
Mcdonald- 80
Fox-79
Posluzzny-79
CB
G Gray- 88
Blanton-87
B Jackson- 80
L Wood- 80
S
Motta- 82
Slaughter-81
Mccarthy- 79
K
Ruffer- 90
P
Turk- 85
I really hope they can do them through team builder this year so there will be no wait.
as for the ratings, I would say that most of the players listed can be knocked down five to ten points... Gray and Smith really jump out in that regard, as well as Rees, Riddick, Jones, Cywnar, Motta, Ragone, Ian Willaims is not a LB and not with the team anymore...
one guy you may have too low though is Ethan Johnson, they may rate him a tad higher actually... who knows though, but the guys I listed should all be about 5-10 hits lower imo
Way too high. You got nobody below a 76? I can tell you that Golston won't be that high. He'll be in the 60's. Motta, Golic, Ragone, L Wood, Walker and Toma won't be in the 80's. Not knocking you, but I think you're being a little generous.
Nobody is below a 76 becuse i didnt list every player, only the important ones. I would bet money Golston is atleast a 70 or higher becuse The freshmen that enrolle earlyer are always rated higher. I do agree though, some of these may be a bit too high but i did them on the top of my head based on all 13 games i watched last year. All in All these are pretty dang close give or take a few points. .
Like I said, not trying to bust your balls too much...I just don't think EA is gonna be that good to us.
Add in the fact that NCAA and Madden both have made some changes to how they do the ratings anyway....there are less players in the 90s and the gap between the stars and complimentary players in overall rating numbers is significantly larger.
Which is how it should be. Sometimes when you're playing, it's as if everyone is the same no matter what the rating. You can literally plug in OL with any rating and get the same result as if you had a guy with a 90 in there.
I've played through entire games only to realize at the end that one of my OL was injured and my backup, that rated in the 60's, was playing for him. And it was no different.
21 is very fair for a pre season ranking
21 is very fair for a pre season ranking
I watched a number of gamplay videos they released yesterday... they have NOT addressed gameplay issues such as LBs and DLmen jumping ten feet in the air to pat down passes intended much further downfield...
or blocking AI
or a DBs ability to pat down a pass prefectly without looking back for the ball at any point...
or DBs floating over to the ball in some superhuman way to make a ball on the ball on a deep pass
or the inability to defend slants and balls over the middle
and for all the tal about zone coverage it sure looks just as bad as last year...
honeslty the gameplay looks EXACTLY the same with the exception tackles
I agree, but somehow Michigan's defense has a better rating than ours.