Ratings came out today and I'm a bit pleased to see that our defense is not that bad! A certain school is now overrated but that can be changed.
http://traditionsportsonline.com/ncaa-12-team-ratings-revealed
so much for that
OT- NCAA Football 12 Ratings
June 9th, 2011 at 8:38 AM
#1
OT- NCAA Football 12 Ratings
June 9th, 2011 at 8:46 AM | 
Prestige!
Prestige!
June 9th, 2011 at 10:26 AM |
Agree. We have the same
Agree. We have the same
Agree. We have the same Prestige as Iowa and Boise State for crying out loud. You know, Boise State that has a proud tradition of winning for the last half of one decade.
June 9th, 2011 at 11:08 AM |
Not to offend anyone..
Not to offend anyone..
though I guarentee this will.. but prestige is based on 2 things. Current production and historical significance.
We should be psyched that we are at a 5 based on the multitudes of factors that make us all bleed maize and blue, because based on our records for the past 3 years we should be a 3 (ala Purdue)
On the fifth night—possibly the sixth—a breeze arose.
It was cool and dewy.
June 9th, 2011 at 11:16 AM |
I get that part somewhat, but
I get that part somewhat, but
I get that part somewhat, but I still think recent success would have to translate to current recruiting to even make the case that a team with a pathetic history should be a 5.
Consider this, Boise has:
1. Zero tradition to speak of before the mid-2000s.
2. A tiny, tiny stadium.
3. No hype for recruiting. Top recruits with several offers from big-name schools do not pick Boise. Consider that our top recruits often pick Michigan over Alabama, Notre Dame, etc. (we lose our fair share to those schools as well). Who are the last 3 players to pick Boise State over Alabama, Notre Dame, Michigan, etc.?
If Boise has NO tradition, a piss poor stadium, a tiny fan base, and even current recruits don't pick them over actually prestigious schools, how can they have an equal prestige rating to Michigan and Notre Dame?
June 9th, 2011 at 11:23 AM |
It's all wins
It's all wins
NCAA doesn't factor in stadium size and all that other stuff. It wouldn't be fun that way. Imagine if you were a Boise fan and won 3 national championships (in the game) but the prestige stayed at 3 because your stadium, which you can't control in the game, is too small. It's just not fair to the player. Prestige in NCAA is all about wins, that's it. Play 5 years in a dynasty and see how things change, it's actually interesting some times. PSU, FSU, and Georgia I've seen drop to 2-3 after 2 or 3 losing/6 win seasons only
-BeanGoBlue
"Those Who Stay Will Be Champions"
June 9th, 2011 at 5:18 PM |
Flamebait? Flamebait.
Flamebait? Flamebait.
These work just as well on Wolverines as Buckeyes. 
Abort, Retry, Fail?
June 9th, 2011 at 8:48 AM |
Special Teams
Special Teams
I'm a little surprised our special teams is a B. Has be because of Hagerup.
Also, its tough to see that we dropped a to a 5 star on the 6 star scale, but I notice that Notre Dame did too
June 9th, 2011 at 8:49 AM |
Wow
Wow
The number of teams with better offenses is just laughable. I mean, really? TCU has a better offense and our defense is just as good as theirs? Even the biggest homer knows that's totally messed up...
And tOSU - better offense than us? They don't even have a starting QB now!
June 9th, 2011 at 9:13 AM |
Well almost surely Pryor is
Well almost surely Pryor is
Well almost surely Pryor is still in the game and part of the calculation that gave them that score.
OH-HOW-I-HATE OHIO STATE
June 9th, 2011 at 11:13 AM |
bigmc..
bigmc..
TCU lost 7 starters on D.
TSIO has, unfortunately, a solid backfield and a more than likely decent offensive line. add in the fact that braxton could be a serviceable starter and that leads to a grind and gut offense.
On the fifth night—possibly the sixth—a breeze arose.
It was cool and dewy.
June 9th, 2011 at 12:40 PM |
What about the O?
What about the O?
They may have lost 7 starters on D but I'll bet a large amount of money their D ends up better than ours. As for the O - they just lost their 3 year starting QB while we bring 10 starters back and they have a higher ranked O?
If I was going realistic for TCU I'd say B or B+ for Offense and A for Defense and we'd be A- for Offense and B for Defense.
And tOSU - has their offense ever really been that good? It's skewed a lot but their defense but even with Pryor I wouldn't put them in the same category as the Oklahoma's that can and will drop 50+ on you, in the first half.
June 9th, 2011 at 9:09 AM |
In the Big Ten:
#6 Ohio
In the Big Ten:
#6 Ohio
In the Big Ten:
#6 Ohio State
Offense: A+
Defense: B+
ST: B
Overall: A
#11 Wisconsin
Offense: A-
Defense: B+
ST: B
Overall: A-
#15 Michigan State
Offense: A-
Defense: B
ST: B+
Overall: B+
#16 Nebraska
Offense: B+
Defense: B+
ST: B-
Overall: B+
#21 Notre Dame
Offense: B+
Defense: B
ST: B
Overall: B+
#28 Penn State
Offense: A-
Defense: A-
ST: B-
Overall: A
#33 Michigan
Offense: A-
Defense: B+
ST: B
Overall: A-
#35 Northwestern
Offense: B+
Defense: B
ST: C+
Overall: B+
#38 Iowa
Offense: B+
Defense: B
ST: B-
Overall: B+
#61 Illinois
Offense: B
Defense: B-
ST: B
Overall: B
#78 Purdue
Offense: B-
Defense: B
ST: B-
Overall: B
#79 Minnesota
Offense: B-
Defense: B-
ST: D
Overall: B-
#83 Indiana
Offense: B
Defense: C+
ST: B-
Overall: B-
Now based on this, these would be the standings in the big ten:
1. OSU
2. Wisconsin
3. MSU
4. Nebraska
5. Penn State
6. Michigan
7. Northwestern
8. Iowa
9. Illinois
10. Purdue
11. Minnesota
12. Indiana
and by division:
Leaders:
1. OSU
2. Wisconsin
3. Penn State
4. Illinois
5. Purdue
6. Indiana
Legends:
1. MSU
2. Nebraska
3. Michigan
4. Northwestern
5. Iowa
6. Minnesota
OH-HOW-I-HATE OHIO STATE
June 9th, 2011 at 10:30 AM |
This is true by ranking, but
This is true by ranking, but
This is true by ranking, but what doesnt make sense to me is if you look at the "Overall team rating" the list shakes up quite a bit.
Michigan, for instance, has the EXACT same scores in offense, defense, ST, and overall as #11 Wisconsin yet we're ranking #33. Someone explain this to mean? I realize its a video game and thus these rankings are somewhat arbitrary but it makes no sense that Michigan's overall A- is higher than several top-25 teams (MSU comes to mind) and yet we're ranking #33.
June 9th, 2011 at 11:06 AM |
Top 25
Top 25
This could be based on their percieved top 25...which would be to say that they believe we are better then our ranking. We would move up alot because they believe we are better then where we started at.
"I know that they know that I know who they are." - Fred Jackson
June 9th, 2011 at 11:19 AM |
Understand completely but
Understand completely but
Understand completely but what is the use in ranking division finish by pre-season rankings as the poster I responded to did? Shouldn't we be ranking division finish based on Overall ranking in-game (putting UM as #3 or #4 overall in the Big Ten).
June 9th, 2011 at 11:51 AM |
I get your point
I get your point
I just took the list as sort of a visual based each division, so we can see where we are stacked up against the other teams in our division.
"I know that they know that I know who they are." - Fred Jackson
June 9th, 2011 at 11:14 AM |
In recent years EA has used
In recent years EA has used
In recent years EA has used the Athlon pre-season rankings as their basis for their rankings. I am not sure if they still use Athlon or roll with Sports Illustrated, either way they take the easy way out. Unfortunately I commented above before thinking. Fail.
I'm going to treat you all the same. Like dogs. - Bo
June 9th, 2011 at 11:10 AM |
WTF, Penn St gets an overall
WTF, Penn St gets an overall
WTF, Penn St gets an overall A- while little bro earns a B+ and a higher ranking. What rubbish.
I'm going to treat you all the same. Like dogs. - Bo
June 9th, 2011 at 5:22 PM |
Lot of sensitive egos that
Lot of sensitive egos that
Lot of sensitive egos that need stroking in the B1G these days.
Abort, Retry, Fail?
June 9th, 2011 at 3:49 PM |
OSU's Offense
OSU's Offense
Looks pre-post-Pryor.
"I love him, he's a great coach, he's a great mentor, he's a great friend. He's every single thing you want a college coach to be, and he does it flawlessly." -David Molk
June 9th, 2011 at 5:22 PM |
500 years in the future:
500 years in the future:
In the beginning, there was Clarettball. And it was good, for a time.
Then there was Smithball. And it was good, for a time.
Last, there was Pryorball, and he turned the lights out when he left the building.
Abort, Retry, Fail?
June 9th, 2011 at 9:19 AM |
curious to see our playbook, they will prolly throw a generic multiple style one on us since they have no clue
June 9th, 2011 at 9:20 AM |
curious to see our playbook, they will prolly throw a generic multiple style one on us since they have no clue
June 9th, 2011 at 9:41 AM |
We have the same grade on defense as nebraska? Thats damn near laughable
Directions to Columbus: South till you smell it, east till you step in it!
June 9th, 2011 at 9:48 AM |
Oregon gets a 6 prestige and
Oregon gets a 6 prestige and
Oregon gets a 6 prestige and we get a 5?! Unreal.
June 9th, 2011 at 10:56 AM |
Have you seen the state of
Have you seen the state of
Have you seen the state of our program over the past three or four years? Not elite by any stretch.
June 9th, 2011 at 10:59 AM |
Agreed, we haven't been elite
Agreed, we haven't been elite
But Prestige is a program thing, not a last 2 years thing. That's why us and ND not being 6* is ridiculous. I think our O and D are ranked too high, those things should be based on recent performance. Not program prestige. Boise playing well for 5 years doesn't = the winningest team in college football history
"Over? Did you say, over? Nothing is over until we decide it is!"
June 9th, 2011 at 11:09 AM |
Prestige is long-term and
Prestige is long-term and
Prestige is long-term and incorporates tradition, success, academics, etc.
June 9th, 2011 at 11:18 AM |
Not in a video game
Not in a video game
Lose 6 games for 3 straight years in NCAA 11 and see how low the prestige drops. In the same vein take a one star school, win 10 games for three years and see how it jumps. Of course in real life we're a 10 on a scale of 1-6 and that will never change based on our history but something has to give for the sake of the game. I'm surprised they don't have us at 4 honestly.
-BeanGoBlue
"Those Who Stay Will Be Champions"
June 9th, 2011 at 9:56 AM |
TCU and Boise St. also have
TCU and Boise St. also have
TCU and Boise St. also have the same prestige as us.......I'm not sure they fully understand the definition of the term prestige.
MUAHAHAHAHA! MUAHAHAHA!
June 9th, 2011 at 10:02 AM |
cut off line
cut off line
i feel like they may have instituted a cut off line - like say, no one after the #30 team can have a 6 prestige - i feel that that is the only explanation
June 9th, 2011 at 10:01 AM |
If Denard doesn't have 99 speed this year
If Denard doesn't have 99 speed this year
Then the whole thing is a sham. I don't care if he's a quarterback, he's one of the fastest players in football.
Janeane Garofalo (Film Actors Guild): "As actors it is our responsibility to read the newspaper, and then say what we read on television like it's our opinion"
June 9th, 2011 at 10:31 AM |
He deserves a 100 speed like
He deserves a 100 speed like
He deserves a 100 speed like Devin Hester got in Madden 2k11.
June 9th, 2011 at 12:08 PM |
I understand where you're coming from
I understand where you're coming from
and I'd agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong.
In this particular case, you cannot destroy game balance in favor of making Shoelace the fastest player on the field.
Don't get me wrong, he probably is in the real world. But games, particularly balanced ones, do not model the real world.
Things like that make the game unplayable or force all players into situations where they have to choose Michigan to be competitive - which again, is how it is in the real world - and that situation is unacceptable as far as game developers are concerned.
June 9th, 2011 at 10:57 AM |
Yeah...
Yeah...
Prestige numbers are stupid. Especially considering the other rankings are almost all based on historical reputation... especially Oregon's 6 stars and our 5... and the fact that our D is just as good as OSU's or Nebraska's...
But seriously. The Number 1 and Number 2 teams in all time college football wins are just as prestigious as Iowa. Or Boise and their 30k person stadium.
Garbage
"Over? Did you say, over? Nothing is over until we decide it is!"
June 9th, 2011 at 11:07 AM |
First, tOSU should never have
First, tOSU should never have
First, tOSU should never have an A+ offense. Ever. Second, I can only assume the first patch will be the removal of that one guy who used to play QB at tOSU.
I'm going to treat you all the same. Like dogs. - Bo
June 9th, 2011 at 11:21 AM |
2006?
2006?
their 2006 offense was pretty good
"2nd and 5. Here he goes again!"
"That's 6."
"They're not going to catch him! Touchdown Michigan!"
June 9th, 2011 at 3:21 PM |
Thats not...
Thats not...
What Florida said in the BCS Championship game...
June 9th, 2011 at 5:25 PM |
osu peaked in the c. 1968
osu peaked in the c. 1968
osu peaked in the c. 1968 Woody era, offense-wise. Troy Smith helped mainstream spread concepts that were already gaining ground at Northwestern and other schools in the B1G, but the Tressel era offenses carry the giant red asterisk of shame for all eternity, in addition to their high-profile let downs in NCGs and other bowl games. Heck, osu could never beat the sec in a bowl game without cutting corners to keep the Tat 5 eligible.
Abort, Retry, Fail?
June 10th, 2011 at 11:33 AM |
Michigan roster I submitted on Operation Sports website
Michigan roster I submitted on Operation Sports website
Let me know what you guys think. This is what I submitted on operationsports.com for Michigan's roster. The rosters are limited to 69 players for dynasty mode.
Offense:
QB
1. Denard Robinson #16, Junior, balanced (Dreads)
2. Devin Gardner #7, Sophomore, balanced
3. Russell Bellomy ?, Freshman, balanced
HB
1. Michael Shaw #20, Senior, speed
2. Stephen Hopkins #33, Sophomore, power
3. Michael Cox #15, RS Junior, balanced
4. Vincent Smith #2 Junior, balanced (Dreads)
5. Fitzgerald Toussaint #28, RS Sophomore, balanced
6. Justice Hayes ?, Freshman
FB
1. John McColgan #49 RS Senior, blocking/power
2. Stephen Hopkins #33, Sophomore, balanced *
WR
1. Roy Roundtree #12, RS Junior, balanced
2. Junior Hemingway #21, RS Senior, balanced
3. Darryl Stonum #22, Senior, speed
4. Martavious Odoms #9, Senior, balanced (Dreads)
5. Je'Ron Stokes #6, Junior, balanced (Dreads)
6. Jerald Robinson #83, RS Freshman, blanced
7. Jeremy Jackson #17, Sophomore, possession
8. Kelvin Grady #19, RS Senior, speed
9. Drew Dileo #26, Sophomore, balanced
10. Jeremy Gallon #10, RS Sophomore, speed (Dreads)
TE
1. Kevin Koger #86, Senior, balanced
2. Brandon Moore #88, RS Junior, receiving
3. Ricardo Miller #80, RS Freshman, receiving
4. Chris Barnett ?, Freshman, receiving
LT
1. Taylor Lewan #77, RS Sophomore
2. Mike Schofield #75, RS Sophomore
LG
1. Ricky Barnum #56, RS Junior
2. Elliott Mealer #57, RS Junior
3. Chris Bryant ?, Freshman
C
1. David Molk #50, RS Senior
2. Rocko Khoury #63, RS Junior
3. Christian Pace #64, RS Freshman
RG
1. Patrick Omameh #65, RS Junior
2. Elliott Mealer #57, RS Junior *
RT
1. Mark Huyge #72, RS Senior
2. Michael Schofield #75, RS Sophomore *
Defense:
LE
1. Ryan Van Bergen #53, RS Senior
2. Kenny Wilkins #41, RS Freshman
3. Will Heininger #39, RS Senior
RE
1. Craig Roh #88, Junior
2. Jibreel Black #55, Sophomore
3. Brennen Beyer ?, Freshman
DT
1. Mike Martin #68, Senior
2. Will Campbell #73, Junior
3. Quinton Washington #76, RS Sophomore
4. Richard Ash #54, RS Freshman (Dreads)
5. Terry Talbott #96, RS Freshman
LOLB
1. Marell Evans #9, RS Senior
2. Mike Jones #27, RS Sophomore
3. Brandin Hawthorne #7, Junior
MLB
1. Kenny Demens #25, RS Junior
2. Brandon Herron #58, RS Senior
3. Kellen Jones ?, Freshman
4. Isaiah Bell #26, RS Sophomore
ROLB
1. Cameron Gordon #4, RS Sophomore
2. Jake Ryan #37, RS Freshman
3. J.B. Fitzgerald #42, Senior
CB
1. Troy Woolfolk #29, RS Senior
2. Courtney Avery #5, Sophomore
3. J.T. Floyd #12, RS Junior (Dreads)
4. Blake Countess ?, Freshman
5. Greg Brown #35, Freshman
6. Terrence Talbott #22, Sophomore
FS
1. Carvin Johnson #13, Sophomore
2. Josh Furman #6, RS Freshman (Dreads)
3. Thomas Gordon #15, RS Sophomore
SS
1. Jordan Kovacs #32, RS Junior
2. Marvin Robinson #3, Sophomore
3. Jared Van Slyke #31, RS Senior
K
1. Matt Wile ?, Freshman (current K's on the roster are terrible)
P
1. Will Hagerup #43, Sophomore
KR
1. Darryl Stonum *
2. Jeremy Gallon *
PR
1. Jeremy Gallon *
2. Drew Dileo *
3. Junior Hemingway *
Head Coach
Brady Hoke
Skin Tone: Light
Size: Big
Apparel: Polo
Hat: None
Glasses: Off
Alma Mater-Ball State
Prestige: B
Age: 52
Specialty: Defense (DL)
Offensive Coordinator
Al Borges
Skin-Light
Size-Big
Apparel- Polo
Hat- Hat
Glasses-Off
Alma Mater- Cal. St.-Chico
Prestige- B+
Age- 55
Specialty- Offense (QB’s)
Offensive Style – Pro-Style/Play Action/West Coast
Defensive Coordinator
Greg Mattison
Skin-Light
Size-Medium
Apparel- Polo
Hat- Hat
Glasses-none
Alma Mater- Wisconsin-La Crosse
Prestige- A+
Age- 61
Specialty- Defense (DL)
Defensive Style: 4-3
* denotes the same player used in multiple positions
Anyone please feel free to rate these players and provide feedback. I have the patience for developing depth charts but rating these guys is always difficult.
You are right, the most offensive number to me was our Prestige only getting at 5.
--
Benjamin in Ann Arbor.
snowfox web design + development