After more than a decade of anticipation, EA Sports’ college football video game franchise will make its highly touted return next week.
But despite the excitement surrounding the release of College Football 25, one high-profile player’s rating in the game has raised some red flags.
Earlier this week, Texas quarterback Arch Manning announced that despite his prior hesitancies, he will be in the game. With College Football 25 marking the first college football video game of the NIL era, current players can opt into being included in the game in exchange for monetary compensation.
News that Manning received an 87 overall player rating in the game, however, has raised questions about whether a $50,000 check is all that Peyton and Eli’s nephew received in return for his inclusion in the game. With the 19-year-old slated to sit behind Quinn Ewers (who adorns the video game’s cover) for a second straight season, some have suggested that his higher-than-expected rating came as the result of a negotiation.
First time I’m beginning to worry that the game is going to suck https://t.co/zQtkQKlTKr
— B1G_Ryan (@B1G_Ryan) July 11, 2024
Arch Manning got $50,000 AND an 87 overall rating to be in the game. This dude might be the best negotiator of all time. https://t.co/I1556rGqKy
— Joe Pompliano (@JoePompliano) July 11, 2024
How he have a 87 overall with no stats 🤔🤔 Make it make sense https://t.co/xytBjf5hSp
— Nate Lewis (@NateLewis77) July 11, 2024
Boy said I’ll sign if y’all make me 85+ https://t.co/NtjWoJUIIV
— Squid 🦑👁⃤ (@QuanQuixote) July 12, 2024
Lmaooo he definitely negotiated that as part of his deal with EA.
— Ben (@HowUBenFeller) July 11, 2024
There’s no denying that Manning’s rating is suspiciously high. An 87 (out of 99) rating is typically indicative of a high-level starter. Manning only played in two games as a true freshman, qualifying for a redshirt season in the process. For comparison’s sake, Ewers — a 2023 second-team All-Big 12 selection who is entering his third season as Texas’ starter and is a projected first-round pick in next year’s NFL Draft — is only five points higher at a 92 overall.
On the other hand, it’s easy to understand why EA Sports was in a tough spot with Manning’s rating. After all, he was the No. 1 overall recruit in the 2023 class. And while there’s yet to be any evidence he’ll live up to that status at the college level, there also hasn’t been any evidence that he won’t.
But whether Manning’s rating is actually deserved or not is somewhat beside the point; the real question is whether EA Sports would compromise the accuracy of its game while negotiating the inclusion of certain players.
This isn’t an issue that video game manufacturers have had to deal with in their NFL, NBA, MLB, etc. games, as players sign over their likenesses for those games via their inclusion in their players’ unions. And this isn’t something the college football video game franchise has faced before, as it previously used thinly veiled avatars (Manning would have been “Texas QB #16” in a past life), which is what led to the franchise’s 11-year hiatus following the Ed O’Bannon lawsuit in the first place.
To be clear, we have no idea whether Manning negotiated his rating with EA Sports, and for the vast majority of fans — especially in Austin — it won’t affect their enjoyment of the game. All things considered, most would rather have Manning in the game with a slightly inflated than not have him in it at all.
But the Longhorns backup’s flip-flop on opting in and his subsequent rating has clearly raised some questions. And it will be interesting to see what other potential controversies come from the return of the beloved franchise next week.
