All of the talk this cycle has been the "stale" nature of NCAA. The fallout has been somewhat mind-boggling. Although there are several presentation and gameplay oriented reasons the game is stale, here are my suggestions on how to make the game interesting through dynasty mode. ********Just to preface this, I'd like to keep any posts in this thread directly related to my suggestions. I don't want this to turn into a wish-list.******** First, here are some of the general fundamental problems plaguing the mode: Choices: There aren’t enough difficult choices or trade-offs when it comes to building your program or picking recruits. Predictability: Recruit 2 players same position same overall they will generally progress the same. Arbitrary results: Why did La Tech just take down Georgia? How is it that Fresno State ran the table? Why is a stacked Florida State team under-performing? There is no answer, because there are no variables to account for these abnormalities. Lack of perspective: Without a centralized hub and story-lines, it’s very difficult to keep track of what is going on throughout the college football world. Studio updates are a step in the right direction, but we need more. No love for the underdog: Ezekial Ansah, Eric Fisher, Jonathan Cyprien: All projected 1st round picks who had little to no notoriety coming out of high school. What’s to account for this? Could they have been “gems” that went undetected by the big dogs? Perhaps, but why can’t a 68 overall recruit develop into a 99 overall first round pick? So without further ado, here are my 15 suggestions as to how to alleviate some of these problems, and make dynasty mode fun again: 1. Storylines Much like in Madden, a central hub with generated stories would go a long way in generating interest in a dynasty. Bama just signed that #1 overall player? I shouldn’t have to dig for that, I want those important articles of information to come to me. 2. Schemes Schemes are something I’ve been looking to see implemented for years. I was glad that the EA team’s implementation of schemes in Madden 13, but felt it was a bit two-dimensional. Schemes yielded no tangible impact on the field, merely a cosmetic drop/increase in overall (and just overall). In NCAA 14, schemes should effect both individual ratings AND progression. If you find a player that fits your scheme, he should progress better than a player who does not. I also think there should be players that fit multiple schemes, and that the computer specifically target scheme fits. 3. Player/Coach traits and personalities As it stands now, there aren’t enough variables that go into whether or not a particular recruit flourishes or under-performs in your system. Stealing a page out of OOTP baseball, players/recruits should have ratings on the following: Leadership, Loyalty, Intelligence, Work Ethic, Potential, Character and Focus. The effects of which could yield very dynamic results and storylines: -A player with poor focus and work ethic might struggle to maintain academic eligibility. -A player with a high leadership rating who is a projected first round pick might opt to return for his fourth -year to lead his team to a championship (ie Matt Barkley and Manti Te’o)/ -A player with high intelligence and work ethic might develop awareness and play recognition faster. -A player with high work ethic and low intelligence might develop strength faster (gym rat). -Low/high character affects team morale and can result in suspensions. On the flip side, coaches need dynamic personalities that influence who develops and who does not. Much like Madden, the choices could be something along the lines of Motivator, Strategist, Team Builder. -A motivator is an expert at developing a player’s physical tools, and can recruit his ass off. Recruits are excited about the opportunity to play for him. -A strategist is an expert at increasing all of his player’s attributes. -A team builder is a shrewd talent evaluator, and is notorious for digging up diamonds in the rough. To take it a step further, coaches (heads and assistants) need individual ratings for the following: Development, Prestige, Leadership, Ambition, and Recruiting Ability. -Recruiting ability: Boosts one’s ability to both recruit high school prospects. -Leadership: Affects both team morale and one’s ability to convince a draft-eligible player to stay. -Prestige: Affects the coaching offers a coach receives, and the recruiting pitch. -Ambition: More likely to accept a more prestigious offer 4. Team chemistry As of right now, there is no variable to account for why certain teams with less talent are more successful than those with more talent. A combination of a coach's leadership ability, the character of the players on the roster, the leadership ratings of players, and the success of the program should directly affect team chemistry. Chemistry should result in temporary but tangible increases/decreases in ratings. 5. Spring ball Spring practices and a spring game should be used as yet another tool to differentiate one player’s ratings from another. As of now, there isn't enough factors in determining why some players win particular position battles. 6. Assistant coaches These coaches should have ratings as well-ratings that affect development, recruiting ability, team chemistry, and how likely they are to bolt for a more prestigious offer. They should be given a certain amount of time to recruit, as in real life assistant coaches play a pivitol role in this department. You should be actively fighting to retain your top assistants, while trying to lure in others. 7. Regional recruiting Assistant coaches should be assigned regions to recruit, and very few schools should be able to recruit on a national scale. Some players should be very difficult to drag out of particular regions. 8. Recruits having stronger sets of interests Recruits who care about particular pitches (prox, academics, prestige) should care MORE about them than as it stands now. They also should have more logical lists of initial schools of interest. I've long said that pitch preferences aren't strong enough. If you have a 4* player who cares most about academic prestige? Stanford, Notre Dame, and Vanderbilt should immediately be on their initial lists. If a player from NC has a very high interest in proximity to home? North Carolina and NC State should be on their initial lists. 9. Less precise scouting/dynamic rankings Scouting success and accuracy should be tied directly to the recruiting. If you’re a mediocre talent evaluator, you should have trouble unlocking accurate ratings. Additionally, players should shift up and down the rankings index throughout the season. 10. More dynamic recruiting pool How many of us have seen that 5’8 171 pound HB with A speed A acceleration and D carry? NCAA 14 needs a more diverse set of recruit skillsets. Why can’t there be a 97 speed back with 80 carry that’s 6’0 210 pounds? Why must every tall/fast WR have terrible hands? 11. Positional depth in the recruiting pool How many years in a row has there been a defensive end rated #1 in real life? Yet in NCAA 13, we still see far too many WRs and ATHs labeled as 5 star talents, and far too few elite DL. My suggestions? -More quality depth at HB, LB, C. -More quality pocket passers and less scrambling quarterbacks (can find the latter as athletes) -Less athletes in general (there are far too many when compared to real life) -Less depth at WR -Gems/busts all too bountiful at OL and DL. Scarce elsewhere. -Less five star players in general 12. Junior class recruiting College Hoops 2K8 implemented this system, and it was one that made me more emotionally invested in the players I was recruiting-a key in maintaining interest in a particular dynasty. Not only should one be able to scout a select number of juniors (say have 10 on your board), but there should also be a junior day in which you can invited up to 5 players to attend, resulting in an interest boost. Here’s the catch: A player can decline an invitation and can only attend 3-5 junior day events. 13. Recruits recruiting As a Notre Dame fan, I attribute much of our latest class’ success with the recruitment of players by current commits. A high profile player with high leadership and character should influence other recruits, as should team chemistry. 14. Playable All-American game Again, getting emotionally invested in these recruits only furthers the overall dynasty experience. Playing with these players in an All American game and getting an actual feel for how their skills translate would be a very cool experience. 15. Declaration/transfer logic As it stands now, there is very little rhyme or reason as to why players might leave or join your program. Player personalities should have an awful lot to do with this, as should the depth of the current draft pool (like this season irl, there is a very deep offensive tackle class. This should make fringe 1st round OTs want to come back). Also, running backs should almost always bolt when given the opportunity to be drafted in the top two rounds. In general, not nearly enough players end up leaving. Though they often can be persuaded by getting their degree, not every player should value a degree as much as the other. This is where player personality should be paramount. For transfers, next to none should leave after being red-shirted their freshman year. It’s completely illogical, as they have to sit out yet another year. Again, player personalities and how they correlate with a coach’s personality should be immensely important, as should depth at their position. In NCAA 13, there is ZERO logic in regards to depth chart. I had a sophomore TE leave for playing time as he was about to assume the starting position (first and second string players were seniors, he was third string). So what do you guys think? Instead of turning this into a wishlist thead, I'd just like feedback on these 15 things.