Sanders vs. Beck: EA Sports College Football 25 quarterback ratings debate

Numbers don't lie with Colorado's "Grown" QB feeling a bit of the "Prime Effect"

EA Sports College Football 25: First Look Colorado Buffaloes /

EA Sports College Football 25 is less than a week away from being released, and with the growing anticipation, the top eight quarterbacks list on the game was released. There seem to be some disgruntled folks who feel there shouldn’t have been a tie for the top-rated quarterback spot between Colorado's Shedeur Sanders and Georgia's Carson Beck. They're saying a clear number one should have been declared by EA Sports.

Let go back to the last time this happened. If you purchased a copy of the 2014 version of the game, which was the last year any college football product was released, there were some concerns over Texas A&M's Johnny Manziel being rated the top quarterback of the game over Alabama University quarterback A.J. McCarron. From a statistical standpoint, there is a case for Manziel to have received the top spot that would shut down the idea that McCarron was overlooked even though his head Coach was Nick Saban.

Player	School	Overall Rank	Comp %	Yards	TD	INT	Rush Yds	Rush TD	QBR
A.J. McCarron	Alabama	1	67.3	3,063	28	7	-22	0	95.6
Johnny Manziel	Texas A&M	2	69.9	4,114	37	13	759	9	90.5

The anticipation is growing to a fever pitch with six days remaining until the game is released. While many just wanted to play for the first time in over a decade, the biggest topic of conversation comes from Colorado with Shedeur Sanders and Coach Prime, who weren’t too pleased with the Buffs "Grown" QB being tied with Beck for a rating of 93. Sanders being a competitor in all walks of life, felt there should have been a winner and loser decided when it came to who was given the number one quarterback rating spot.

Since the good folks at EA Sports are currently getting things together for the launch of the game, let's look at the top quarterbacks they've listed to see if there might have been something overlooked that would coincide with Coach Prime and Shedeur's logic over the ratings. Not only the Buffs quarterback, but the two-way star Travis Hunter should have been different.

Hunter missed three games due to injury and looked to be a bit hobbled in another gameduring last season. Sanders missed a game and a half after he was pulled from the Washington State game down 14-0 in the first quarter. This was after getting sacked four times, adding to the massive number of 52 sacks he had already suffered for the season.

As for Hunter, he was ranked tenth overall with Sanders being ranked 24th, according to a list released on Forbes this past Wednesday. Looking at the criteria used for these quarterbacks to determine where each should have been rated, Shedeur should have a lower rating.

Player	School	Rank	Rating	Comp %	Yards	TD	INT	Rush Yds	Rush TD	QBR
Shedeur Sanders	Colorado	17	93	69.3	3,230	27	3	-77	4	63.1/ 56th
Carson Beck	Georgia	18	93	72.4	3,941	24	6	116	4	86.0/ 5th
Dillion Gabriel	Oklahoma/Oregon	27	92	69.3	3,660	30	6	373	12	87.0/ 4th
Quinn Ewers	Texas	30	90	69.0	3,479	22	6	75	5	78.3/ 17th
Jalen Milroe	Alabama	71	90	65.8	2,834	23	6	531	12	80.5/13th
Jaxson Dart	Ole Miss	73	90	65.1	3,364	23	5	391	8	78.5/16th
Jalon Daniels	Kansas	79	90	74.7	705	5	1	74	0	82.6/ 7th
Kaidon Slater	Liberty	90	90	61.0	2,876	32	6	1,098	12	83.7/9th

** This is the list of the top eight EA Sports College Football 25 quarterbacks and stats from last season.

The rating scale for athletes has become more about politics and doing favors; instead of letting the numbers show what a player was able to do against their competition. The rating of Sanders was more so a favor for Coach Prime, because there is no way Travis Hunter is on the cover and Shedeur is not being talked about as a top athlete at his position in the game.

This is by no means a dig at either athlete ability of Sanders or Hunter, but looking at the numbers neither one should have been in the top 10 rankings or ratings overall at their position because their respective numbers don’t reflect that. If the criteria for generating who should be rated or ranked goes according to how the number one athlete was chosen for the product from the start.