Player Potential

[chief286]

There has been much talk on here about a player-potential rating. I and others have suggested a player-potential rating. But at the same time, many have asked for more unexpected recruiting results. There is a way to have both.

Player potential should exist. But it should not be visible. In other words, player development would NOT be random, but it would not be visible in a viewable 1-100 rating. Instead, the only way to get a "clue" as to player potential should be from your asssistant coaches. And of course, their predictions' accuracy should depend on their "recruit scouting" rating.

So, when I send an assistant coach to a game, he would tell me : this kid looked great, but I he doesn't look like he has much room to develop. Or, this kid is a raw talent. Or, this kid is hit-or-miss.

[kghst18]

I agree with you. My comments under “Recruiting” (a Dec 16th post) almost mirror your comments. I have simmed a few seasons (about 12) and have discovered getting the top recruits is not always the best thing. I recruited, as early commits even, the top 3 players in the country and after 4 years on my team they improved to 84s and 85s. Early on in my simulation (I think year 3 or 4) I recruited a 3 star center who was ranked somewhere in the mid 300s. He eventually improved to a 98 player as a senior. This does make some sense as the top HS recruits do not always become the best college basketball players but there must be a way for gamers to evaluate this progression.

In comparasion with EA's NCAA Football 2004 the recruiting is missing this stat along with the following:

1) Grade HS and JCO players with letter grades and make it more realistic in the sense that the more time (visits and calls) you put into a recruit the more detailed info you get. NCAA 2004 does a nice job of this by informing you of a players bench, 40 time, GPA, throwing power/accuracy for QB, ect.... The more investment you put into a player the more you find out.

2) Give a wider range of points between 5 star players and 1 star players. A 5 star should be somewhere in the 80s, 4 stars mid to high 70s, 3 stars low 70s to high 60s, 2 stars mid to high 60s and 1 stars 59 and below. These numbers would need to correspond to what an average NCAA team rating on the game would be. If a team in the 90s is an elite team, 80s in a very good team, team in the high 70s is a good team, a team in the mid 70s in an average team, a team in the low 70s is a poor team and a team rated 69 or below is a bad team then my guess on the stars would be accurate but that is ultimately up to the developers.