Dynasty deleted somehow.
I am in an online dynasty on NCAA 26. I was playing against the computer on the online dynasty and quit mid-way through the game without completely quitting that app ncaa. Well the next day I get on to finish the game and my online dynasty is no longer available. But the guys I’m in the dynasty with have sent photos and I’m still in the dynasty. But I cannot access it anymore from my profile. And I did not delete the dynasty, I just exited the game and it’s happened before but I usually just have to restart the game but this time it is not loading my online dynasty. Any tips on how to get the dynasty back. I’ve restarted my Xbox, I’ve disconnected from the internet and connected back and it seems nothing is working.Conference tiebreakers incorrectly factoring in non conference mutual opponents
In my dynasty, both Memphis and UTSA are tied in the American standings, but they have both played San Diego State. Memphis beat San Diego State, UTSA lost to them. However, UTSA has the better record in terms of mutual in conference opponents, so they should get the tiebreaker over Memphis.Proposal: Simplify Archetypes (Less Clutter, More Gameplay)
Proposal: Simplify Archetypes (Less Clutter, More Gameplay) Quick context (related post): Before this, I posted another proposal about simplifying roster management while keeping the depth chart stable. The point was: The roster should put players into position families without assigning them to a specific side, and the depth chart should be the main “identity layer” for the game engine, and the game shouldn’t push people into constant formation subs and endless shuffling just to make things work. Less menu work = more time playing, scheming, and actually learning matchups. This archetype proposal goes with that same philosophy: cut clutter, improve clarity, and let players develop naturally. The problem: Archetypes have gotten bloated. A lot of them overlap and feel like “labels for the sake of labels.” Recruiting becomes sorting tags instead of scouting players. Modern college/NFL football isn’t full of one-dimensional specialists. Most starters have to do more than one thing. A kid can come out of high school as a “run defender” and still have the capacity to develop pass rush moves or coverage skills in college depending on coaching, scheme, and reps. Right now the game leans too hard into: “You are this label forever.” That’s outdated. The goal: Fewer archetypes that actually mean something on the field. Less UI clutter in recruiting More emphasis on body type, traits, and scheme fit Archetypes should bias development, not lock development Defensive Line: Interior DL should only have 2 archetypes. We don’t need separate “power rusher” and “speed rusher” archetypes at DT. That’s style, and it should be expressed through body type, ratings, and traits, not separate labels. IDL Archetypes (2) Anchor (Space Eater / NT type) Eats doubles Holds point Forces cutbacks Compresses the pocket with power Defined by: STR / BSH / AWR-PRC / TAK / traits that help vs doubles Disruptor (3-Tech / Penetrator / “whatever name sounds best”) Shoots gaps Creates negative plays Collapses pocket Can win with either finesse or power moves Disrupts run fits Defined by: ACC / AGI / FMV-PMV / PUR / get-off traits Power vs speed should come from: weight/body type STR vs ACC/AGI pass rush ratings trait package Not separate archetypes. Edge should only have 2 archetypes: Same thing here. “Power vs speed rusher” is a style difference, not an identity difference. Edge Archetypes (2) 1) Edge Threat (Pass Rush Specialist) Wins rushes with finesse or power Forces quick throws Closes on QB Defined by: ACC / COD / FMV-PMV / PUR / AWR-PRC / rush traits 2) Edge Setter (Anchor / Contain) Sets the edge Maintains leverage Spills runs inside Defined by: STR / BSH / TAK / PUR / AWR-PRC discipline traits Unicorns should be rare (not a third archetype) The “do-it-all” guys should exist, but they should be rare and earned. Your Aaron Donald / Von Miller / JJ Watt types should show up as elite rating spreads + elite traits, not an archetype you can just shop for every year. Cornerbacks CB should only have 2 archetypes: Physical or Nimble Modern defense requires versatility. “Man-only” or “zone-only” corners aren’t the norm at the top level. 1) Physical CB Wins with press and contact timing Plays the catch point Disrupts releases Defined by: press/strength + jam/catch-point traits Quickness is still needed to be serviceable or elite. 2) Nimble CB Wins with quickness and leverage Mirrors routes better Recovers faster Defined by: COD/ACC/AGI/SPD + mirror/play-ball traits Field/Boundary shouldn’t be archetypes; If you want to keep them, make them alignment preferences or coaching tendencies. But as archetypes it’s mostly window dressing unless it actually changes behavior and development in a clear way. Halfback: HB also has too many labels. Keep it simple: 1) Elusive Playmaker (space, cuts, explosives) 2) Elusive Bruiser (breaks tackles but still creates) 3) Contact Seeker (downhill, falls forward, wears defenses out) 4) All-Purpose (run + receive + align anywhere) “All-Purpose” can come in different flavors (lighter or bigger) based on body type and ratings. No need to split it into 10 sub-archetypes. One can argue that all purpose backs should be rare, similar to the do it all defensive lineman. But, there are average all purpose backs and there are great all purpose backs. I only propose changes to archetypes for positions that make sense for the moment. I’m content with the archetypes at other positions but if you think they need refinement please make changes using my ideas in this article as the guideline. The most important change: archetypes should bias, not lock: Archetypes should represent what a player is best at right now and what they’re most likely to develop into. But development should still be driven by: coaching/scheme reps/usage offseason focus dev traits facilities So a “run defense” kid can develop pass rush and coverage skills as well to adapt. That’s modern football. What this improves Recruiting becomes scouting again (body type + traits + scheme fit) Less clutter, less menu time, more gameplay Player growth feels more realistic Roles are clearer: “what job does this guy do on the field?” Pairs well with my roster and depth chart stability proposal (less shuffling, more consistency) If EA wants “modern football,” the design needs to reflect it: versatility, role clarity, and development based on coaching + usage — not label overload.Dynasty Recruiting Bug
Hard sell is not viable in CFB 26, Hard sell should be your end all be all your literal “HARD SELL” not random points I put in a recruit that don’t count. Take for reference my pictures….. HOW DO I HAVE A WEEK 1 VISIT, PIPELINE TIER OF 2, HARD SELL OF A+, A+, AND B AND MY INFLUENCE IS BARELY EVEN TOUCHED AFTER THIS. Come now this is rediculous, fix dynasty HEAVILYNCAA College Football Dynasty PS5
Here are some ideas that I have for the game to make things a bit more enjoyable. Expand the editing/customization options for the appearances. Custom Playbooks.....Is it me or does it seem like all the colleges have the same "playbook". My opinion is they should be different and more unique for said school. I think there should be a process for moving to another school/accepting a new coaching job. It was disappointing that literally it is one click and done. I think it should be a process like....express interest....interview....maybe multiple.....and not a given that you will get the job. Perhaps a newsletter that you get with a coaching vacancy/open position which will have a deadline date. You choose to apply for the job now or until the deadline. Then there could be reverse effects if your school finds out that your testing the water and maybe let you go. Put in some real world processes might make it more interesting on pulling the trigger or not. Injuries seems to be a big deal in this game. Most of what I've experienced are minor and back quickly, which makes it unbelievable versus real life situations. Again maybe more reality will help here! Hope this helps! Let me know what y'all think of these ideas.What If Dynasty Allowed Offseason Archetype Drift? (Balanced Idea)
Hey everyone, I’ve been thinking about a way to add long-term development depth to Dynasty without breaking balance. Concept: Archetype Drift (Offseason Only) Allow players to change a player’s archetype one rung per offseason (e.g., Backfield Creator → Dual Threat) to reflect coaching development over time. Safeguards: Only one rung per offseason. Costs 50% of offseason XP. Attribute caps do NOT change. Cannot gain more ability slots than currently have. Cannot exceed current highest ability tier. This would allow identity evolution without raising ceilings or creating ability inflation. It uses existing XP and archetype systems and would make long-term development feel more realistic. Curious if others would want something like this in Dynasty.Proposal: Simplify ROSTER Positions, Keep Depth Chart Positions
Proposal: Simplify ROSTER positions, keep DEPTH CHART positions (for stability + better lineup logic) I think EA would improve both roster clarity and engine stability if they separated two things that are currently tied together: Roster Position (plain / broad) Depth Chart Role (nuanced / scheme-specific) The core idea Make roster positions plain (RB, OT, OG, C, DT, EDGE, LB, CB, S, etc.), but keep the depth chart exactly how it is today (LT/LG/C/RG/RT, SAM/MIKE/WILL, FS/SS, etc.). Right now, it feels like EA’s engine can get “locked” into rigid roster labels (LT vs RT, SAM vs WILL) in ways that cause weirdness with sorting, auto-fill logic, and role assignment. If the roster positions were broad, EA could treat players as part of a position family first, then let the depth chart + attribute weighting decide where they actually fit best. What this would fix (why it’s more stable) • The engine wouldn’t be forced to assign roles/sides based on a rigid roster title. • Users and CPU teams could naturally get the best 11 on the field because players aren’t “tied to a side” by a roster label. • The depth chart remains the place where the nuance lives (LT vs RT, SAM vs WILL, etc.), but the roster stays clean. Important guardrail (my biggest concern) If EA did this with no restrictions, I could see the engine doing something stupid like: • the same OT is “best” at both LT and RT and starts at both. So this system must include duplicate restrictions for both user teams and CPU teams: No player can be assigned as the starter at two parallel positions (or any two positions that appear on the field at the same time). If a player is already slotted at one spot, he should be blocked/greyed out from being slotted into the parallel spot. Ratings should drive “left vs right” once placed on the depth chart Even if the roster says OT, the moment you highlight a player for LT vs RT, the game should evaluate him differently (attribute weights / archetype fit) and show a projected OVR for that depth-chart role, like it does now. I also think overall shouldn’t show on the roster screen On the roster list, I’d rather see attributes only (or at least hide the overall by default). Overall should be contextual and role-based: the projection should show up when you’re placing a player into a depth chart role (LT, RT, SAM, etc.), because that’s where the weighting actually matters. Proposed plain roster positions (with depth chart staying the same) RB • Covers HB + FB types. You place them at HB/FB on the depth chart based on skill set. OT • Can be placed at LT or RT. If he’s bad at both tackle roles, you might move him to OG during offseason position changes. OG • Can be placed at LG or RG. C • Same as now. DT • Can be a penetrator or NT type. Depth chart can still have DT/NT slots; attributes/body type decide where he fits best. EDGE • Can be 3–4 OLB type or 4–3 DE type. Coverage ratings should matter more for the 3–4 edge types. LB • Can play MIKE/SAM/WILL. Archetype + attributes determine who fits where (ex: Thumper = SAM, Signal Caller = MIKE, Lurker = WILL). CB • Outside CB or NB. S • Can play FS or SS In hybrid defenses like 4–2–5 and 3–3–5, you effectively have two Strong Safeties on the field: • SS1 = STAR (the nickel/overhang safety who plays over slots, fits the run, and is involved in coverage adjustments) • SS2 = WS/Rover (the second “box safety” role on the opposite side, depending on the playbook/formation) I actually like the current system, but EA should clarify this in the UI so casual players understand what they’re investing in when they recruit/develop safeties. A lot of people don’t realize that in these hybrid looks, you aren’t just building “one SS and one FS” — you’re often building two SS-type roles with different jobs, and your roster resources need to reflect that. DB • True utility secondary player (likely ATH types) that can play anywhere in the secondary. (Other positions that aren’t “parallel” can stay basically the same.) Optional: depth chart roles could be refined even more (only if feasible) If EA can handle it cleanly: • Make DE / DT / NT / EDGE real depth-chart roles with different weighting. • Consider SAM as the hybrid edge type for base 3–4. • Make DE the hybrid 5-tech that can play strongside in 4–3 and 5/4i in 3-4. • Make EDGE the main pass rusher archetype (speed/power). If that’s too complicated to implement reliably, then keep the current depth chart system—but the roster simplification + duplicate restrictions is still the main stability win.when in recruiting my controller buttons just stop working
On my PS5 when I'm in recruiting my controller buttons just stop working randomly I have to back out and go back in recruiting to get my controller buttons to work.I thought I would post this because this started after a couple update ago I thought it would have been fixed by now. I just have this problem on this game
College Football 27 Wish List
Teambuilder: A. Offline mode for Teambuilder. B. Customizable Stadiums. C. Customizable Entrances for any stadium. D. I am ok with replacing teams but add ability to ALSO ADD teams. E. Endzone Print for bowl games. F. BRING BACK EDITING TEAMBUILDER PLAYERS!!! Customization: A. Create A Player for online/offline dynasty. There is NO REASON we should not be able to create our own players outside RTG and Teambuilder as a BUYER of the game. We did not create the game. Or as stated above B. BRING BACK EDITING TEAMBUILDER PLAYERS. Removing this was ridiculous!!! They are not real players!! C. Editing recruits in dynasty mode. Note: I get it. NIL is in full effect but there is no reason customization should be this bad! EA cannot be sued for what I do in the comfort of my own home!! Presentation: A. Some sort of College Gameday. B. Better halftime show. C. Celebration on the field after breaking a record. D. Field storming. E. Senior Day on the last home game of the season. F. Senior Game and Spring Game. There are tons others. Those are just my MAIN ones!
