**Official NCAA Football 2010 Wishlist Thread**

[millikin54]

I forgot to include something in my previous post...

7. Have the coaches exist as part of the roster file, or as a separate coach-roster file. This will allow us to name all of the coaches and continually tweak their strategies as we see fit. It will also allow us to share them with others via the EAlocker system.

[jdrhammer]

Custom Playbook is a must-have.

This lost feature is as big of a joke as not having formation subs.

[Maxattax3]

i agree jdr. and they should bring back create-a-play too.

[Benjiryle21]

A Mountain West Conference schedule that rotates every year, not just between the first and the second year >: (

[UnderRatedCoast]

Didn't get through all the others before posting my wishlist, so I'm sure some have been covered already.

1) QB read option plays. These don't work. Ever. Find a way for them to work.

2) Run blocking. I don't know if it's possible, but I'd like to see assignment blocking. In real football, unless you're running a zone blocking scheme like the Denver Broncos, each blocker has a player assignment that varies depending on how the defense lines up. On a counter play, for example, the defensive end will often be left unblocked purposely by the offensive tackle, so that they can either block down on the DT or slide to a LB (if you don't know what these terms mean, you probably shouldn't be designing a football game). A pulling guard will then trap the DE, PUSHING THEM out of the play. That's right, pushing...not just going into a standing block animation. That's how the hole is created, and the FB would lead up the hole, blocking the first guy that poses a threat. How the game is set up right now, the lineman basically block whoever is directly in front of them, so on any play that has a pulling lineman, either the lineman gets in the way, or a DL runs into the vacant spot left by the pulling lineman and makes a tackle in the backfield. While that does happen occasionally in real life, it's because the DL beats the downblock, not because the rest of the lineman had someone in front of them to block.

Another thing that bothers me is the power running formation verses the dime defense. If I run an I-formation dive, and my opponent comes out in a dime defense, I should be averaging at least 8 yards per carry.

DB reactions. Anyone who ever played DB knows that the first move, regardless of whether you are playing man or zone, is to read pass and backpedal. That's why WR screens work. How many times have you ever seen a CB break up a WR screen, let alone intercept one and take it to the house?

Position changes in the offseason: If a wide receiver runs a 4.6 forty yard dash in real life, and you change move him to TE or CB or QB, I'm pretty sure he'd still be able to run a 4.6 forty. So when I do it in the game, why does a RB who I move to FB, go from 89 speed to 66 speed? True, his awareness at that position wouldn't be as high, and his blocking might not be good for a fullback thus lowering his overall rating, but he sure isn't going to suddenly get slower.

Recruiting: As someone said before, diamond in the rough players is a great idea, and I've noticed that there are some in NCAA 09. What I'd like to see, though, is something like a Potential rating that is kind of a hidden rating. That means you may recruit a 5* guy who would be about an 83 overall his freshman year, but only get a point or two better per year over the next four years and graduate as an 87 or 88 overall (think Chris Rix). On the flip side you may get a 2 star recruit who starts out 67 overall as a freshman, but gains 7 or 8 points per year and finishes as a 90 overall (think Steve Slaton or Pat White). I also can't stand locked in player positions. Why can't I move a freshman OLB to MLB without him losing 15 points on his rating? Why can't the 6'5" 235 lb WR I recruit be moved to TE without dropping 10 points? Why aren't tackles, guards, and centers more interchangable. OLineman switch positions all of the time without much, if any, dropoff from position to position. Also, you recruit players as athletes, but very rarely can a guy be put at more than one position and be effictive. Sometimes a guy will have the same rating at WR as he does with CB, but you can't just recruit an athlete and put him at whichever spot you really need him.

Roster size: In real life, teams are allotted 85 scholarships per year. In the game you only get 70. Why? I'm getting tired of working hard to fill all of my scholarships, only to have to cut 10 of them. Don't give me 25 scholarships to fill if I can't keep 25 players. Not only does it piss me off, it makes other teams who could have had those players worse than they should have been. If I am going to have 17 spots left on my roster next year after the seniors are gone, give me 17 scholarships to fill. Also, if walk-ons are basically going to be worthless POS's that will never see the field, don't put them on my team. If I need 2 MLBs and don't fill the spot with scholarships, leave me short 1 MLB. Show me a team that ever cut a scholarship RB for a walk-on MLB because they were short on MLBs. Team's change scheme to fit their personell, not the other way around. Look at Cal's switch to the 3-4 this year due to their surplus at LBs and deficit of quality DL.

Training: I don't really want to have to do mini games in the offseason, but I would like to have some semblance of control over what my players work on. If my QB has 92 throw power, but only 78 throw accuracy, it upsets me when they go up by 4 throw power and only 1 throw accuracy the next year. Perhaps you can have your top 3 choices of what you are training players to work on, or you have points to assign to training over the course of the season or whatever.

That's all I feel like typing right now, perhaps I'll add more later.

[chia51]

Quote: Originally Posted by therizing02

Started a thread for this but, it belongs here too. I was actually thinking that this would be a great way to create a more realistic playing game. For FIFA 09 (here I go again) the developers have added Team Tactical Sliders. Each slider has a 1-100 scale and based on how they are set, the team actually plays to the settings. Unlike NCAA and Madden that just have a Coach Setting there are 10-15 settings in FIFA. With that many settings there are about 50,000 potential combinations. Since we all know that the play calling is atrocious this year in Madden and NCAA I thought that this would be a good way to not only fix the problem, but create a more realistic experience at the same time. Some ideas for tendencies: Offensive Tendency Sliders Run vs. Pass Run vs. Pass on 3rd and 7 or more Run vs. Pass on 3rd and 4-6 Run Vs. Pass on 3rd and 4 or less Run vs. Pass on 1st down Run vs. Pass on 2nd and 8 or more Run vs. Pass on 2nd and 4-8 Run vs. Pass on 2nd and 3 or less. Run vs. Pass on 4th and 7 or more Run vs. Pass on 4th and 4-6 Run vs. Pass on 4th and 3 or less Defensive Tendency Sliders Zone vs. Man Separate blitz tendencies for all down and distance situations mentioned above. You get the idea. I'm sure others will have more suggestions. With custom tactics in Franchise Mode and having the ability to view your opponent's tactics for the upcoming game you would then be able to put a game plan together based on tendencies. Again, creating a more realisitic/sim style game. For the casual gamer. Have the option to turn off the custom tactics The greatest thing about how the FIFA team is implementing this is that the game will be shipped with pre loaded team tactics based on the development team's knowledge of the playing style of the actual teams IRL. Admittedly they know many of them will be incorrect, so they have allowed the user to upload the custom team tactics to the EA Locker for every user to download if they want. This will work out well because by the time the game ships in the US (it ships in Euro first) most Europeans will have the true to life tactics uploaded for their favorite teams. On day one I'll be able to download the actual tactics used by any team I want. Liverpool will play like Liverpool. Chelsea will play like Chelsea. Manchester United will.... Isn't this what we've been wanting in NCAA and Madden forever? The teams in the game playing and calling plays like their real life counterparts? Custom Team Tactics and/or Team Tendency Sliders not only give you this but, you also get the bonus of EVERY game play differently based on tendency sliders. With the play calling the way it is now every game pretty much plays the same. The overuse of the QB Wrap play, Corner blitzes, and lack of CPU deep ball are just killing the game from a strategic standpoint. Given this Community's and others desire for a realistic gaming experience I'm certain that two days after release the custom team tendency sliders will be available for every team in the game in someone's EA Locker right? Thoughts?

please do this and make it per coach, so if a coach transfers in my dynasty that the team will change accordingly... ie june jones hawaii to smu, also have these tendencies play into recruiting so that the team recruits players to go with there offense, defense, etc...

[chia51]

SPECTATOR MODE:

I want to be able to watch another online dynasty game! It allows users to scout other people... also it doesnt matter if you can talk to the players or not, i dont care if i can even hear what they are saying. I just want to be able to watch them play, preferbly in a broadcast cam... that would be fantastic!

[kgx2thez]

Quote: Originally Posted by Swingking77

I The Engine Needs Work!!! The engine needs to be completely reworked. This has been the problem with Madden for years now. We still see things like vacuum blocking (which could be a simple as having the linemen suck to the D instead of the D player with a clear line getting sucked into the blocker), vacuum catches, rocket/jet pack catches, the ball turning end over end like the magic bullet from the JFK incident to get into a receivers hands. These all serve as serious clues that something is a muck with this outdated engine. We now have the tools that can deliver physics at an amazing level giving us the ability to create games with physics like those in Half Life 2 and many more. There is no reason other then laziness to continue on your current course of action based on this shotty engine. There is merit in what I am saying as far as physics, the proof is in games like Half Life 2, engines like those found in Gamebreaker (which relates directly). The time has come for a new engine which no longer relies upon, dare I saw it, two systems ago or on physics limitation that systems like the PS2 and Xbox had upon their launch. On the offensive side of things: QB Scramble Accuracy. Every year in every game we see players that use teams like Michael Vick’s Falcons and West Virginia in NCAA ’09 because they can move their QBs around in an insane and unrealistic manner simply because it isn’t penalized in serious manner what so ever. I love the idea behind the All Pro Football ring that fills as a QB sets his feet indicating how ready he is to throw the ball. THAT makes realistic football sense. The faster a guy is on his release, the quicker he sets his feet, or the less his has to set his feet (if you want to look at it that way) before he can deliver a good ball. This is a crucial part of football. Even Vick, as mobile as he was, had a very poor completion rating, why, because a QB cannot throw 50 yard bombs with laser like precision. It’s like making and NBA player maintain his shooter rating despite constantly pulling up for fade-away three pointers. Further to this point is what direction he is running in. A right handed QB will throw better rolling out to his right, then if he were rolling out to the left. It’s just physics! WR Catch Cone. This is something that I’ve come up with in an attempt to not only curb jet packing on offence and defense. How this works is kind of like how the QB vision cone works, only in reverse. The tip of the cone indicates where the ball will hit the ground. The cone fans out, fading out towards where the pass came from. The degree to which the cone fades is impacted by how the WRs jump and catch ratings are and what kind of pass was thrown. A lob will have a shorter/wider cone as the balls is coming down from higher but allows receivers a chance to adjust to the ball where as a bullet pass will have a narrower/longer cone as it got heat on it making wider catches harder but giving some nearer the line of scrimmage a chance to make the catch and/or tip the ball. This should obviously be an option that one can turn on or off, if desired, but at the very least should be a consideration on how to design the physics of how to make the sprites catch the football. It can also be something that is adjusted via a slider as well under the title of something like WR ability. If a player is out of these zones, they cannot interact with the ball. They can jump and what not, but they will not impact the trajectory what so ever on the ball. The more faded the cone, the less likely they are to effect the desired action like tip or catch the ball.>> >> On the defensive side of things: >> Defensive Match Ups. Why this has never been implemented in the game before, I’ll never know. Beating the defense in your games is as simple as making your starting WR the second or third WR in the depth chart. Why because you can’t make players match up. I don’t care if it is in zone coverage, you’ll never see some third string DB line up against a guy like Moss. If Champ Bailey is on the field, he is told before the game, you’re on Moss, where he goes, you go. This in and of itself lends itself to all kinds of strategy and adds a depth to the game that this franchise has been sorely missing since its inception. It such a simple and fundamental part of the game that one would assume that it would have been in a game since the very start. The same goes for linebackers and RBs, TEs, QBs, etc. We shouldn’t have to forced to play great players with lack luster defenders simply because the option to match them up doesn’t exist. And if for some reason there is a lower ranked DB with more speed then the starter, again we should be able to match them up to what ever player we want on the offence. Defensive Assignment to Pick Plays. Simply picking a set up D package where everything from the linemen, backers, DBs and Safeties is chosen for you is annoying. It also makes for exploits on offence. What I propose is that when picking defensive plays we be allowed to first pick the formation, then pick what the D-line does, stunt, bull rush, pinch, contain. Then pick what the linebackers do, zones, blitzes, man. Same for DBs and Safeties. This would make playing D not only entertaining but a lot more effective. Common plays like prevents and what not should also be pre-made, but the option to create on the fly defenses would be a huge asset in making this franchise dominant on a realistic level. Simplified Defensive Hot Routes. Making adjustments to the D should not be a complicated thing where one can only adjust a very small portion of what takes place on the field. As an example DBs playing Man in a zone formation. By the time one has done all of the button pushes and pressed and held all of the directional sticks to simply set one guys up, the ball is snapped and no one else has even been adjusted. Simply make it so that when you select a group to adjust you use buttons to represent the various members in that group hit a button and you get that player’s personal options. It can be as simple as by default having it that once you select someone, opposing players are not represented by a button and you simply hit that button and the guy plays man on them… This is not new, this was in 2K and it worked like a charm! See Catching Cone. Only that one defense, we reduce the number of buttons to defend passes. If the player isn’t in the cone, the button performs a tip and a tip only. If the player is in the cone, the computer must decide weather or not the player will attempt to intercept based on ratings, or swat it. Resulting in a fairer passing defense. Franchise Create a Play that acutely works and doesn’t come from another game that has nothing more to offer people who play Madden, then this feature.

I know this is old but I'm just getting around to reading this and you make some pretty damn good points despite the jumbled formatting in the begining.

The QB scramble accuracy NEEDS to be implemented and the defensive play selection process would give a breathe of fresh air to that stagnant side of the ball. I'm tired of virtually picking the same defense over and over again.

I don't see what is so hard about programming defensive matchups with CBs on certain WRs. I guess there is some strategy involved in sliding Maclin into the slot but it creates way too much cheese. If I have a stud CB and his job is to shadow Maclin, these 2 little things called "eyes" will enable him to see where Maclin goes after he breaks the huddle. If he's locked up in man, and regardless of motion, my CB will follow him. While it's definately more of a NFL style move the fact that you can line up Crabtree, Maclin, Harvin (insert gamebreaker here) in the slot against my 3rd or 4th CB who is in man2man coverage is complete crap. I can accept it for zone coverage.

I would also like to see some sort of off-season/in-season training drills ala College Hoops where my skills will help to determine what a player improves on. Like someone else mentioned, I want my kids to work on areas they need to improve on. In real life, hard work in practice gets a player better results on the field.

I've exhausted myself thinking about the flaws.

[UnderRatedCoast]

Quote: Originally Posted by UnderRatedCoast

Didn't get through all the others before posting my wishlist, so I'm sure some have been covered already. 1) QB read option plays. These don't work. Ever. Find a way for them to work. 2) Run blocking. I don't know if it's possible, but I'd like to see assignment blocking. In real football, unless you're running a zone blocking scheme like the Denver Broncos, each blocker has a player assignment that varies depending on how the defense lines up. On a counter play, for example, the defensive end will often be left unblocked purposely by the offensive tackle, so that they can either block down on the DT or slide to a LB (if you don't know what these terms mean, you probably shouldn't be designing a football game). A pulling guard will then trap the DE, PUSHING THEM out of the play. That's right, pushing...not just going into a standing block animation. That's how the hole is created, and the FB would lead up the hole, blocking the first guy that poses a threat. How the game is set up right now, the lineman basically block whoever is directly in front of them, so on any play that has a pulling lineman, either the lineman gets in the way, or a DL runs into the vacant spot left by the pulling lineman and makes a tackle in the backfield. While that does happen occasionally in real life, it's because the DL beats the downblock, not because the rest of the lineman had someone in front of them to block. Another thing that bothers me is the power running formation verses the dime defense. If I run an I-formation dive, and my opponent comes out in a dime defense, I should be averaging at least 8 yards per carry. DB reactions. Anyone who ever played DB knows that the first move, regardless of whether you are playing man or zone, is to read pass and backpedal. That's why WR screens work. How many times have you ever seen a CB break up a WR screen, let alone intercept one and take it to the house? Position changes in the offseason: If a wide receiver runs a 4.6 forty yard dash in real life, and you change move him to TE or CB or QB, I'm pretty sure he'd still be able to run a 4.6 forty. So when I do it in the game, why does a RB who I move to FB, go from 89 speed to 66 speed? True, his awareness at that position wouldn't be as high, and his blocking might not be good for a fullback thus lowering his overall rating, but he sure isn't going to suddenly get slower. Recruiting: As someone said before, diamond in the rough players is a great idea, and I've noticed that there are some in NCAA 09. What I'd like to see, though, is something like a Potential rating that is kind of a hidden rating. That means you may recruit a 5* guy who would be about an 83 overall his freshman year, but only get a point or two better per year over the next four years and graduate as an 87 or 88 overall (think Chris Rix). On the flip side you may get a 2 star recruit who starts out 67 overall as a freshman, but gains 7 or 8 points per year and finishes as a 90 overall (think Steve Slaton or Pat White). I also can't stand locked in player positions. Why can't I move a freshman OLB to MLB without him losing 15 points on his rating? Why can't the 6'5" 235 lb WR I recruit be moved to TE without dropping 10 points? Why aren't tackles, guards, and centers more interchangable. OLineman switch positions all of the time without much, if any, dropoff from position to position. Also, you recruit players as athletes, but very rarely can a guy be put at more than one position and be effictive. Sometimes a guy will have the same rating at WR as he does with CB, but you can't just recruit an athlete and put him at whichever spot you really need him. Roster size: In real life, teams are allotted 85 scholarships per year. In the game you only get 70. Why? I'm getting tired of working hard to fill all of my scholarships, only to have to cut 10 of them. Don't give me 25 scholarships to fill if I can't keep 25 players. Not only does it piss me off, it makes other teams who could have had those players worse than they should have been. If I am going to have 17 spots left on my roster next year after the seniors are gone, give me 17 scholarships to fill. Also, if walk-ons are basically going to be worthless POS's that will never see the field, don't put them on my team. If I need 2 MLBs and don't fill the spot with scholarships, leave me short 1 MLB. Show me a team that ever cut a scholarship RB for a walk-on MLB because they were short on MLBs. Team's change scheme to fit their personell, not the other way around. Look at Cal's switch to the 3-4 this year due to their surplus at LBs and deficit of quality DL. Training: I don't really want to have to do mini games in the offseason, but I would like to have some semblance of control over what my players work on. If my QB has 92 throw power, but only 78 throw accuracy, it upsets me when they go up by 4 throw power and only 1 throw accuracy the next year. Perhaps you can have your top 3 choices of what you are training players to work on, or you have points to assign to training over the course of the season or whatever. That's all I feel like typing right now, perhaps I'll add more later.

Just a couple more thoughts I had today:
QB throw power/accuracy/awareness. It seems to me that these are worthless ratings (aside from perhaps throw power) if the QB is being controlled by a player. If I can choose myself whether to throw a ball in front of or behind a WR, that eliminates the need for QB accuracy. With my true freshman QB in an online dynasty (78 accuracy) I led the nation in completion percentage with around 80% accuracy. If I can choose whether to throw a bullet pass or a lob pass, that would eliminate the need for an awareness rating for my QB. My thought is that if I see a WR coming open on a slant pattern, and I push his pass button, my QB's awareness rating should affect whether he chooses to throw a lob or a bullet, and his accuracy rating should affect how much he leads the receiver. As it stands right now, I only recruit based on throw power and scrambling ability, since accuracy and awareness only seem to have negative effects on 1 or 2 passes per game. Perhaps the key is to add a "read coverage" rating, which would effect that part of the game, and an awareness rating, which would effect a qb's throws based on pass rusher pressure.

QB rollouts: I roll my QBs out all of the time. It keeps me from getting stuck in the pocket when no one is open. But I audible to slide protection toward the way I roll, and stay near the middle, which many teams do when rolling their QBs out. But what the cheezers do is snap that ball and run all the way to the sideline on one side of the field or the other, then wait for someone to come open, or throw the ball away right before they get sacked. This makes for many 10 to 20 second plays during the game due to the suck blocking by the OL. In real life, a DE in taught to keep their outside arm free when engaging a blocker so that they are able to effectively keep contain on a RB or QB. Every time a QB rolls out to the side like that, they should either be throwing on the run while being chased by a DE, or getting sacked as they try and do it.

Player height/weight effecting gameplay. If you have a 240 lb DT (which a lot of the recruits in a dynasty mode will be small like this), and they are going against a 300 lb lineman, they should be getting absolutely dominated and pushed around the entire game. As someone else stated in another thread, even if you have a 2* LT who weighs 330 lbs, he's going to be stronger than a 180 pound RB. If you have a 5'11" QB, their passes should be getting knocked down often by the DL. If you have a 6'7" WR, they should be outjumping every 5'10" CB to get a jump ball. A 250 pound LB should be better at stopping the run than a 205 pound one. There is no such thing as a 175 lb power running back. A 240 lb RB, regardless of their speed, would absolutely crush a 190 lb CB if they had a head of steam.

Scouting/developing recruits: Different coaches have different scouting abilities. We can look at my favorite team, the Oregon Ducks. Our three potential all americans on defense are Patrick Chung at safety, Walter Thurmond at CB, and Jairus Byrd at CB. These three were all either 2* or 1* recruits. Obviously, someone at Oregon saw something in them that many other big time schools didn't, since they have all started since their freshman years. Oregon consistently competes as a top 25 team year in and year out despite rarely having a top 15 recruiting class. So they are either scouting players better than other teams, or developing the talent better than other teams, or a combination of both. This should be addressed. NCAA basketball has scouting abilities for coaches, as well as training abilities, as well as the ability to add different assistants with different skillsets. It would be sweet if NCAA football would do something similar. Having the 5*, 4*, 3*, etc. ratings predetermined is a good thing, but to uncover the letter grades of recruits you should have to scout them out starting their junior years.

More quickcall options for recruiting: Sometimes I don't want to have to take the time to call my recruits, but I still want to uncover more pitches. But I'll quickcall and the time I allot to talk to the player will be spent selling an already uncovered pitch. So we should have the quickcall option to either uncover pitches, or hard sell already uncovered pitches.

More recruiting in general: Sometimes I'll really want to land a recruit, but I'll be in second place slightly behind another computer controlled team. Even if I spent 20 minutes on them for half the season, I am still slightly behind. You'd think that if I just started bumping the time I spent up to 60 minutes, I'd be able to pass them in interest. All that seems to happen, though, is that the team who is recruiting against me gets the same exact interest gain that I do when I increase the time spent on the recruit.

Recruit commits: It's really upsetting when you get your recruit's interest entirely full, but they don't commit. You can have the interest meter all the way full, while the second team is only 3/4 full. Your guy doesn't commit (even if they had an A+ visit) no matter how hard you recruit him, then another team comes up 3 weeks later and your recruit commits there despite everything you've done. Also, it's really upsetting when a guy commits to a school that doesn't even offer them a scholarship. That's just plain retarded.

[youALREADYknow]

I've seen a lot of recruiting complaints, but I'm of the belief that recruiting is already far too easy for the user. I always start with 1-2 star teams rated in the 60's and build them up and there's no way I should be able to get top 10 recruits to come to Temple in the first year unless they are 100% matching in all of their Most, Very High, and High categories. The same applies for good 3-4 star recruits who seem to always be available regardless of your team's prestige. I've never had a recruiting class outside of the top 60 and have never really had the feeling that I was a 1 star program when recruiting. I've also never really felt the need to go after lower caliber prospects who have me in their top 5 to start the season since I'm confident I can land higher caliber prospects every offseason.

On the same topic, I have no idea why teams with 6 stars like USC, Miami, Florida State, and Texas are chasing after 2-3 star prospects instead of these prospects falling into their laps. I'll routinely see 4-5 star prospects who don't get any offers through a good portion of the season and it's extremely easy to fly up their lists just by making offers and giving them some quick call minutes each week. On the flip side, I'm fighting tooth and nail with a top 25 program to get a 2 star prospect rated 1000th overall to commit. Make top programs recruit like top programs and not like some mom-n-pop organization. At the same time, keep some year to year variance in what programs get top prospects.

In real life, most prospects already know their favorite schools that they want to attend before recruiting officially begins and a lot of prospects sign early because one of these schools makes them an offer early in the process.

SUGGESTION: Introduce another aspect of recruiting that is tied to a prospect's favorite schools. Give every prospect a list of 3 or 5 favorite schools that are automatically positioned at the top of his interest list in Week 1 and become the only schools that can call or schedule visits within the first few weeks of the season. This should be a static list that does not change regardless of the recruiting process. The favorite schools can be tied into the kid's pitches which give a preview of what their interests are without actually showing their pitch importance. The teams that are not on the favorite school list should still be able to contact the player by quick call (preset to 10-15 minutes, not variable to 60 minutes) and/or offer a scholarship to make some progress in recruiting and show initial interest.

In addition, make the Most important pitch more of a deciding factor in the recruiting process. I should not be able to get a prospect to commit where I'm fair or average in a few of their Most or High rated pitches unless it is the offseason and they aren't getting any scholarship offers.

Lastly and this may be my biggest gripe of all with recruiting... DO NOT SHOW THE OVERALL RATING IN THE RECRUITING PROCESS! I really don't know who thought this was a good idea. In fact, there shouldn't be much indication of actual ratings in the recruiting process at all. If I'm going after a recruit, by default I'll know their 40 time, bench, squat, and GPA (should not be 100% tied to awareness, but that's another topic for another day). Why not introduce more of this kind of data to the recruiting process?

SUGGESTION: If you want to know about a prospect's strengths/weaknesses, then you schedule a scouting visit to THEM and you get their game statistics plus a brief scouting report from your team's scout that unlock a few rating grades. The user could even choose which ratings the scout should look for similar to the way we choose which pitches to talk about in campus visits.

The user should be limited to a certain amount of scouting visits per week (ideally only a couple) and this is how a player's football skills are discovered.

This helps the user feel like they are actually looking for diamonds in the rough since a guy could have a slow 40yd time and have a bad GPA, but could have outstanding positional ratings that make them worth more than a typical 3 star prospect. You wouldn't know about that until scouting the player.

Those are my only recruiting suggestions. I actually believe recruiting is one of the more developed features in the game already and could become the saving grace for the lack of innovation on the gameplay and game engine side of NCAA.